BIG IDEAs: Using Randomised Controlled Trials to Reduce Bias in the Workplace

Discrimination and social inequalities continue to pervade the workplace. The UK's Gender Pay Gap website, Equal Pay Day and the global #MeToo movement are but a few examples that highlight the growing awareness of deeply-embedded structural inequalities against women at work. These inequalities come about in part because of conscious and unconscious biases held against women - but it isn't just women who suffer. Bias is rife in the workplace towards other disadvantaged groups such as ethnic and racial minorities, people from lower socioeconomic backgrounds and the LGBTQ+ community. Although recognition of these problems is growing, businesses struggle to find solutions to level the playing field. What can we do to help reduce inequality and discrimination at work?

Through the UKRI Future Leaders Fellowship (FLF) hosted at the University of Exeter, my goal is to use causal interventions to reduce bias workplace to help create more equality at work. This project leverages the latest insights from across economics, psychology and management to design interventions that will be tested in large-scale randomised controlled trials (RCTs) within several UK organisations. These interventions will lead to a better working knowledge of how we create more fairness in the workplace, disseminated through the public-facing Centre for Behavioural Insights: Gender, Inclusivity, Diversity, Equality and Access ("BIG IDEAs") at the University of Exeter.

Gender bias is now a well-recognised phenomenon and many organisations try to tackle this problem through "unconscious bias" training. However, there is little evidence that this training works towards the advancement of women and, if anything, it can backfire, giving those completing it the false impression that they are "cured" of unconscious bias (Dobbin & Kalev 2016; Atewologun et al. 2018).

The problem in fact goes much deeper: bias is often deeply ingrained in our minds and affected, even amplified, by the institutions and social environment in which we live (Thaler & Sunstein 2008). A combination of conscious and unconscious bias have likely negatively affected the career developments of women (Bohnet 2016; Sheltzer & Smith 2014). But these biases extend also to other disadvantaged groups: workers from racial or ethnic minorities often face discrimination in the workplace, too; and so do individuals from a lower socioeconomic background (Bertrand & Mullainathan 2004; Stephens et al. 2019). My research agenda takes a comprehensive view of bias at the workplace, studying and aiming to reduce bias against these disadvantaged groups.

This project is the first to test novel interventions (possible solutions) through multiple, longitudinal RCTs inside organisations. It goes beyond the study of surveys which have looked at correlations of bias and work outcomes; instead, I propose to actually introduce and causally test interventions to reduce bias to create a more equal workplace on the ground, observing the actual hiring, promotion, and retention outcomes of disadvantaged groups.

This kind of research thrives through collaboration and co-creation with organisations. Some of my partner organisations are among the largest UK employers, including Unilever, a pioneer in addressing gender inequality. Others are start-ups and consultancies, including the Behavioural Insights Team, GapSquare and MoreThanNow, who work with influential clients who want to overcome bias against disadvantaged groups.

In sum, my research aims to test co-created interventions in the workplace to reduce bias against disadvantaged groups and contribute to a more equal society.

References: Atewologun et al (2018), Equality Human Rights Commission. Bertrand & Mullainathan (2004), AER 94(4), 991-1013. Bohnet (2016), What works, HUP. Dobbin & Kalev (2016), HBR. Thaler & Sunstein (2008), Nudge, YUP. Sheltzer & Smith (2014), PNAS 111(28) 10107-12. Stephens et al (2019), Curr Dir Psych Sci 28(1), 67-73.

Who might benefit from this research?

(1) Disadvantaged groups
(2) My partner organisations: Unilever, BIT, GapSquare and MoreThanNow
(3) Corporate and non-profit organisations
(4) Government Equalities Office
(5) Equality and Human Rights Commission
(6) Harvard Gender Action Portal
(7) All-Party Parliamentary Group on Women and Work
(8) Financial Conduct Authority
(9) Advocacy groups
(10) Activists

How will they benefit from this research?

Disadvantaged groups (including but not limited to women, ethnic and racial minorities, people with low socio-economic background, and people with protected characteristics) are the main beneficiaries of this research. My research will improve the status quo for these groups who may have experienced bias and discrimination in the workplace: they will benefit by being treated more fairly, getting hired and receiving promotions adequately by organisations who use the insights from this research.

Similarly, my research will also have benefits for corporate and non-profit organisations (especially my partner organisations) who are interested in hiring and fostering the best talent. First, these organisations can learn where in their organisational process bias exists. My research will result in step-by-step guides (including off-the-shelf code) to enable organisations to identify bias in their hiring and promotion practices. Organisations who use these tools can see at which point in their pipeline a "bottleneck"-potentially caused by bias-occurs.

Second, organisations who already know they have a problem with bias against certain groups can benefit from this research by testing potential solutions to remove bias. They can use these insights through user-friendly resources I will offer: for example, booklets that give clear guidance on how to implement the tested intervention, or by signing up to a tailored workshop that I will offer through the University of Exeter's Centre for BIG IDEAs. By restructuring their hiring and promotion processes, they will hire and promote without bias, which results in a workforce that thrives in the organisation because of their achievements, not their demographic characteristics.

On the policy side, the UK Government Equalities Office (GEO) and the Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) will be major beneficiaries of my research. My research will inform their future research reports and guidance on new legislation which have a combined reach to several million people. Other policy-related groups who will benefit from this research include the Harvard Gender Action Portal (GAP), the UK All-Party Parliamentary Group (APPG) on Women and Work and the Financial Conduct Authority (FCA). GAP maintains a repository of practical advice for policy-makers on how to reduce gender inequality, which my research can directly contribute to. The APPG brings together parliamentarians of all parties to discuss issues relating to women and the workplace. The APPG can benefit as my research brings recent data and evidence into their debates. In its 2017/2018 annual report, the FCA states that the "Diversity and Inclusion agenda is central to how the FCA acts, both as an employer and as a regulator" (FCA, 2018, p.4). Keen to work with researchers and be transparent about its goals and data (p. 10), the FCA would benefit from my research by bringing it into its own organisation and into its work with UK firms and consumers.

The final beneficiaries comprise of advocacy groups and activists who care about equality for all genders, ethnicities, LGBTQ+ and other disadvantaged communities. A lot of advocacy and activism is based on principles of equality and human rights, but there is not always consensus on what practical steps to take to reduce bias or discrimination. My research will benefit these advocates and activists by providing practical and evidence-based advice that they can propose to their target audience (e.g. legislators, MPs or firms).