Behavioral Science & Policy

Nations routinely assess economic and social progress by measuring productivity, growth, longevity, and other objective indicators, and they then use the measures to guide policy. Yet the classic metrics do not directly assess an important goal of economic and social policies: improvements in people's own evaluations of their well-being. Improving people's feelings of well-being is important in its own right and can lead to enhanced personal and national economic prosperity. Today, governments at all levels—as well as businesses and community organizations—are increasingly complementing the standard measures with data from surveys that ask respondents about their day-to-day happiness, overall satisfaction with life, and sense of purpose. In this article, the authors describe many examples of how governments and other organizations are applying these measures of subjective well-being to inform and improve policy decisions.

Empowerment has been a buzzword in many companies for decades, and research shows that empowerment enhances individual, team, and company performance. In practice, though, empowerment programs often fail. People who institute the programs frequently have a narrow understanding of what empowerment is, and this limited view probably helps to account for the failures. Drawing on several decades of organizational-science research, we provide a more useful, robust definition of empowerment and describe obstacles that company leaders and other employees can throw in the path of empowerment initiatives. We then provide empirically driven, practical recommendations for overcoming the obstacles and for otherwise enhancing employee empowerment, such as having leaders model empowerment and changing the company climate to align with more empowering policies and procedures.

To explore the effectiveness of behavioral policy interventions on workplace inequality, we focus on four categories of interventions: affirmative action practices, targeted human resource management, diversity training, and accountability and transparency practices. We assess the impact of each of these approaches on improving employment outcomes for women and underrepresented minorities, and we highlight the approaches’ key design features. On the basis of this review, we offer recommendations for developing and implementing organizational policies and practices to increase workforce diversity and career growth at all levels and to decrease discrimination in the workplace. We also suggest directions for researchers, organizations, policymakers, and regulatory bodies to pursue.

In “Designing More Effective Practices for Reducing Workplace Inequality,” Quinetta Roberson, Eden King, and Mikki Hebl suggest robust strategies for addressing inequality.¹ They also list unanswered questions, such as whether any practices improve employment opportunities across all demographic groups or contexts. I see one potential answer: that organizational leaders and researchers look to intersectionality as a framework for addressing inequalities that occur inside and outside of organizations.²³

An intersectionality framework considers the effects of belonging to multiple social groups simultaneously—for instance, the ways that being both Black and a woman can undercut opportunities beyond the independent ways that being Black or being a woman can. The failure to recognize how diversity policies affect people who belong to multiple disadvantaged groups will perpetuate inequalities rather than eliminate them.

Organizations invest nearly $8 billion annually in diversity training, but questions have arisen about whether training actually reduces biased attitudes, changes behavior, and increases diversity. In this article, we review the relevant evidence, noting that training should be explicitly aimed at increasing awareness of and concern about bias while at the same time providing strategies that attendees can use to change their behavior. After outlining five challenges to developing and delivering training that meets these goals, we provide evidence-based recommendations that organizations and facilitators can use as a blueprint for creating anti-bias training programs that work. One recommendation is to couple investment in anti-bias training with other diversity and inclusion initiatives to help ensure that the billions spent each year yield meaningful change.

I commend Evelyn R. Carter, Ivuoma N. Onyeador, and Neil A. Lewis, Jr., on their thorough, compelling, and thought-provoking article, “Developing & Delivering Effective Anti-Bias Training: Challenges & Recommendations,” which reviewed the challenges that organizations face in using diversity training to develop employee competence at interacting with people who differ from them.¹ Although I recognize each of the challenges they present and respect the solutions they offer, I want to address an additional important challenge to developing a workforce that embraces diversity—namely, that organizations are dependent on the labor market to provide prospective employees who possess the knowledge, skills, abilities, and other competencies needed to fulfill job responsibilities, yet too much of the labor force seems to start off with little inclination or skill for interacting constructively with diverse groups.

Roughly 20 years have passed since Nancy E. Day and Betty J. Glick published the results of a national assessment detailing the level of employer satisfaction with the diversity-related competency of typical college graduates in the United States.² They concluded that “HR managers who responded believe that college graduates do not possess the critical skills that are needed to handle diversity” and that “a minority of the organizations surveyed attempt to fill the diversity KSA [knowledge, skills, and abilities] gaps through corporate training.”² A good deal of anecdotal evidence suggests that these conditions persist today; hence, one could argue that organizations are being forced to do the best they can with the little they have been given.

The business case for diversity holds that diversity leads to synergy; that is, having multiple perspectives results in performance benefits, such as improvements in decisionmaking, problem-solving, creativity, and innovation. Research on diversity in teams has documented conditions under which it leads to improved performance. Current diversity management practices in organizations, however, focus more on preventing the negative effects that can follow from diversity (such as discrimination and lack of inclusion) than on how to gain the performance benefits that diversity can afford. In this article, we draw on recent reviews of the team diversity and diversity management literatures to suggest strategies likely to stimulate synergy from diversity. We conclude that diversity management practices must include actions that are designed specifically to spur teams to integrate diverse information and perspectives. In addition, such practices are most likely to enhance performance if they are deployed as part of a bundle of diversity management practices (rather than as stand-alone initiatives) and if formal human resources diversity practices are complemented both with informal diversity-supporting leadership actions and with formal accountability systems for monitoring whether practices are implemented as intended.

In “Synergy From Diversity: Managing Team Diversity to Enhance Performance,” Daan van Knippenberg, Lisa H. Nishii, and David J. G. Dwertmann observe that misalignment between diversity theory and actual diversity management practices often prevents organizations from achieving the systematic performance benefits diversity can bring.¹ Whereas theory on diversity emphasizes the preconditions required to create synergy in groups that are diverse, diversity management practices have largely addressed legal concerns relating to discrimination and are rarely designed to promote the creative integration of diverse ideas. The authors suggest several helpful actions policymakers can take to increase synergy from diversity. These include developing specific procedures that spur teams to integrate diverse information and perspectives, leveraging the role of team leaders, establishing accountability structures for meeting diversity objectives, and implementing bundles of aligned practices. To those suggestions, I add two others, relating to the way organizations communicate about diversity practices.