What lies beneath

“If you are neutral in situations of injustice, you have chosen the side of the oppressor. If an elephant has its foot on the tail of a mouse, and you say that you are neutral, the mouse will not appreciate your neutrality.” Desmond Tutu

Organisations that have taken into account the changes in equalities legislation have placed a greater emphasis on policies, procedures and inclusive practices. Some of these have now become complacent, however, with the misguided
belief that they do not need to take any further measures regarding diversity and inclusion.

Through ongoing research conducted in
various parts of the world, it has become increasingly apparent that colleagues make choices that discriminate subtly in favour of
or against certain characteristics in a person or group. These choices are based at an unconscious level, known as ‘unconscious (implicit) bias’ or ‘hidden assumptions’.

King’s College London describes unconscious bias as “the biases we have of which we are
not in conscious control. These biases occur automatically, triggered by our brain making quick judgements and assessments of people
and situations based on our background, cultural environment and our experiences”.

Biases are found in situations where individuals have the power to influence outcomes through their decision and actions. As a result of these unconscious biases, recruitment processes, promotions, allocation of work, performance reviews, and redundancies are not conducted in a fair and consistent manner. The job/promotion/task is given to a preferred person as opposed to the right person. Creativity is not used.

Tackling assumptions and acknowledging attitudes is a powerful agent for change. The bridge-building process/overcoming barriers requires conscientious responsibility to be aware and a willingness to change one’s attitude and an organisation’s processes.

Acknowledging and addressing unconscious bias is a first step in creating business environments where organisations attract,
retain and nurture the right skills, irrespective
of any differences, visible or not.

Cultural boundaries

One or two of my Indian friends who have lived in the UK for over 40 years are often surprised when I mention that I am meeting male English friends for a coffee and catch up. One even asked what I would talk about and shared that she would find these types of meetings uncomfortable. For these particular friends, interactions with (white) British men are limited only to work-related discussions and there is no engagement at a social level.

We all hold biases and prejudices and these are manifested in our behaviours towards certain people who look, act and dress differently from us. We naturally tend to gravitate towards people with whom we feel safe or we perceive to think
like us. These thought patterns, assumptions or biases, built up over time, become a perceptual scanning process, filtering out certain aspects and allowing key preferences; all based on perceptions and interpretations.

Hard-wired preferences

During training sessions I have facilitated, I have often noticed that when there is a racially diverse audience, the black participants will most likely sit together on one side of the room and the white participants on the other side.

Participants, after they have been made aware
of the seating situation, are usually surprised about the unconscious segregation. These preferences are hard wired into our brains at a neurological level.

The implicit preferences are formed by our
social and cultural contexts and experiences. If challenged about these biases, most of us do feel uncomfortable that some of our behaviours are based on stereotypes and concept of differences.

Malcolm Gladwell, in his book The Tipping Point, asserts that within the first seven seconds of interacting with a stranger, we will make an average of 11 judgements about the person.
We will subconsciously continue to gather
data to justify and maintain these judgements. Ongoing research has shown that there is bias in work-related situations among individuals who have the power to influence outcomes through their decisions and actions. According to the UN: “Discriminatory behaviour takes many forms but all involve some form of exclusion or rejection.”

Workplace discrimination

In recent case Ms C Howard v Metropolitan Police, the employment tribunal upheld that the Met had directly discriminated against PC Carol Howard
on the grounds of race and sex.

Having closely studied details of the case,
in parallel to direct discrimination, there are patterns of unconscious (implicit) bias. For instance, Howard’s line manager, Acting Inspector Kelly, had formed the view that the claimant was dishonest and that she was not up to the standard required to work in the diplomatic protection group. Through the manager’s own admission,
he had formed a negative view of Howard early on. He doubted her honesty and ability.

The rather telling statement from the tribunal was: “The senior officer always assumed the worst about PC Howard, without having any credible basis or explanation for forming such a view.”

The tribunal concluded that there had been a “course of conduct” by the acting inspector that was “designed to, and which, in fact, did undermine, discredit and belittle her”.

It would seem that Kelly’s unconscious (implicit) bias had created an inflexible and negative belief about the claimant and some of his decisions and choices, overt as well as subtle, discriminated against Howard’s race and gender, two major salient factors in evaluating and judging people.

The tribunal concluded that Howard was treated the way she was because she was black and because she was a woman. It would appear that the manager, as per Gladwell’s assertions, had created a process
of looking for what he believed in and interacting with the claimant in a manner only to confirm
these beliefs.

It is easy to speculate, given the outcome from
the tribunal, that the manager did not engage
with or manage Howard as effectively as expected. This clearly indicates there were biases at play when the claimant raised concerns about discrimination.

Recruitment test

There are other incidents of bias. Research conducted by the Department for Work and Pensions in 2012 found that applicants with typically white British names are more likely to be shortlisted for jobs than those with names that originate from Asia or Africa. Men are more likely to be appointed than equally qualified women.

In 2012, think tank Policy Exchange sent
out 1,000 identical CVs for bar work and personal assistant jobs. Half the CVs claimed to be sent
by 25-year-old applicants and the other half by applicants who were just over 50. The CVs sent by the 25-year-olds were 2.25 times more likely to
get a response.

We fundamentally value differences and strive to be inclusive. At the same time, scientific research has demonstrated that biases, although thought to be obsolete or extinguished, remain as residual debris in most of us.

Collaborative research conducted in a
number of universities in the UK and the US indicates a link between hidden biases and
actual behaviour. Simply put, because prejudices are outside our awareness, the subtle (and negative) behaviours that follow are usually ignored or trivialised.

One of my favourite stories where unconscious bias has been dealt with effectively is in hiring musicians for orchestras. Historically, there was
an unspoken view that certain heavy instruments, such as the trombone, cello and drums, were considered masculine. It was felt that women did not have the capacity or the stamina to play them as well as men and therefore were not appointed
to perform.

In a move to stop conductors ‘choosing favourites’, partitions were placed between the musician and the judging committee so all decisions were based solely on what was played and heard, thus avoiding implicit bias towards men. The number of female musicians playing in orchestras has increased as a result.

As Gladwell said: “The fact that there are now women playing for symphony orchestras is not a trivial change. It matters because it has opened up a world of possibility for a group that had been locked out of opportunity... orchestras now hire better musicians, and better musicians mean better music.”

Ignorance is bliss. This, however, goes against
the grain of inclusivity – lack of awareness is now no longer an excuse. Once you are aware of how your unconscious bias is influencing your thoughts and current decisions, you can take steps to retrain your brain to think differently about certain traits and alter your reactions to them.

A greater awareness of unconscious bias
will undoubtedly lead to a more diverse and inclusive culture, made from a wider, rich
pool of talent. SJ

RESETTING THE AGENDA Recently, it was reported that BBC staff were sent on an ‘unconscious bias’ course to address concerns that they tended to recruit people like themselves, therefore hindering the broadcaster’s efforts to embrace diversity. James Harding from the BBC was quoted as saying: “If we really are determined to make the BBC more representative of the audiences it serves then we have to intervene. There is no single fix that is either practical or fair. Instead, we have to set in motion a great many things which will, together, add up to a fundamental change. “Across news, we worry that we have a tendency to recruit in our own image, so all members of the news group board have taken a course in unconscious bias.” Despite all the positive publicity and role models created from the 2012 Paralympic Games, it seems that disabled people are still suffering from higher levels of unconscious bias. Elsewhere, a recent report from the Employers Network for Equality and Inclusion (ENEI) suggests that levels of unconscious bias against disabled people are almost 8 per cent higher today than before the Games in 2012. The research also shows disabled people to be the group that suffers from the highest amount of unconscious bias when compared with gender and ethnicity, with one in three of those taking part in the study showing at least a moderate level of unconscious bias against the visibly disabled.

Snéha Khilay is the director of Blue Tulip Training