Abstract:
A system and method of evaluating and enhancing diversity of an entity utilizes employee responses, entity self-assessment responses and relevant objective data to determine a rating indicative of a current level of diversity. The responses and data can be analyzed to determine steps to be taken to enhance the current level of diversity. Subsequent to the steps having been taken, another rating can be determined indicative of a most recent level of diversity. The most recent level of diversity can be compared with the prior level to evaluate progress from one level to another.

Description:
FIELD OF THE INVENTION  
       [0001]     The invention pertains to business methods. More particularly, the invention pertains to systems and methods for developing a more diverse work force and environment within a business or governmental entity, or other organization.  
       BACKGROUND OF THE INVENTION  
       [0002]     Business entities have recognized that the ability to attract and retain talent can mean the difference between success and failure in a competitive economy. For a non-profit or governmental entity, it can mean the difference between program success and failure.  
         [0003]     In a multi-ethnic, multi-cultural society, a potential work force can be expected to be filled with talented individuals from many different types of backgrounds, religions, ethnic groups, disabilities, sexual orientations and/or family status. The ability to attract and retain a very diverse group of employees becomes a very positive and important business or governmental asset. In fact, mission success may be dependent on the organization&#39;s ability to develop a more diverse work force, or universe of suppliers or vendors.  
         [0004]     In addition to a work environment that enables an entity to benefit from differing employee experiences and skills in life, and from different outlooks in addressing and successfully accomplishing outstanding tasks, a climate where a diverse that is promoted and encouraged also contributes to employee satisfaction and long term retention of such employees. This is particularly important in circumstances where there are long product life cycles. Such cycles can include not only relatively long term development phases, but also long term product usage requiring customer support and an understanding of program and product history which may be needed for business continuity. Market success may be dependent on understanding a culturally and ethnically diverse actual or potential client base, or universe of vendors and suppliers.  
         [0005]     Statutory and regulatory provisions are established and enforced for purposes of promoting equal employment opportunities, promoting affirmative action and the like. Nevertheless it would be desirable to be able to move beyond legally mandated standards to provide an inclusive environment where talented individuals, men, women, from all walks of life, with various religious or cultural backgrounds, and with or without disabilities, have an opportunity to contribute to the success of their respective entities at all levels.  
         [0006]     An inclusive, more diverse environment should enable a business entity to become a more effective competitor, exhibit increased performance, creativity and innovation, and improved productivity. Such an environment would not only increase employee fulfillment and success but would also provide for greater program or mission success. Similar comments apply to improving the environment and diversity levels of other organizations such as governmental or non-profit entities. Such entities would also benefit from enhanced degrees of diversity.  
         [0007]     Preferably, the above objectives could be facilitated and achieved by providing a common language or definition of diversity, along with a standardized behavior based framework for evaluating diversity within a portion of an entity or across the entire entity. Further, it would be desirable to provide a uniform process which can be used to measure and assess diversity progress. It would also be desirable if the process was iterative in nature with results being usable to make further adjustments or improvements in diversity levels throughout portions or all of the entity so as to enable the business entity and all its employees to participate in and benefit from the diverse work environment.  
       SUMMARY OF THE INVENTION  
       [0008]     A method of assessing diversity of human resources of a business includes establishing a model that comprises information representative of progressive levels of diversity and selected business characteristics. The method further includes assessing, in relation to the model, data representative of diversity of the business, and producing a diversity rating for the business. Further aspects of the invention provide for improving and re-assessing diversity to determine progress. 
     
    
     BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS  
       [0009]      FIG. 1A  is a diagram of an exemplary multi-level model including multiple key business characteristics in accordance with the invention;  
         [0010]      FIGS. 1B and 1C  are charts showing further details of the model of  FIG. 1A ;  
         [0011]      FIG. 2  is a flow diagram of an exemplary method of assessing and improving diversity in accordance with the model of  FIGS. 1A-1C ;  
         [0012]      FIG. 3  is a diagram indicative of types of data collected in carrying out the method of  FIG. 2 ;  
         [0013]      FIG. 4  illustrates a data processing operation to determine a current overall level of diversity;  
         [0014]      FIG. 5  illustrates an exemplary employee survey;  
         [0015]      FIGS. 6A, 6B  illustrate details of processing responses to an exemplary survey question;  
         [0016]      FIG. 7  illustrates details of processing responses to a plurality of exemplary survey questions;  
         [0017]      FIG. 8  illustrates exemplary business unit self-assessment questions;  
         [0018]      FIG. 9  illustrates business unit self-assessment related processing associated with selected operational business characteristics;  
         [0019]      FIG. 10  illustrates details of objective data processing;  
         [0020]      FIG. 11  illustrates various exemplary business characteristic weightings;  
         [0021]      FIG. 12  illustrates additional processing details in determining a current over-all diversity level;  
         [0022]      FIGS. 13A and 13B  together illustrate processing operations to determine business unit diversity, and to permit performance of gap analysis for developing an action plan to improve diversity;  
         [0023]      FIG. 14  is a block diagram showing a method of assessment and re-assessment of diversity for determining extent of progress in diversity;  
         [0024]      FIG. 15  is a block diagram of a system in accordance with the invention; and  
         [0025]      FIG. 16  illustrates an exemplary display for presenting various diversity related values. 
     
    
     DETAILED DESCRIPTION OF THE INVENTION  
       [0026]     While embodiments of this invention can take many different forms, specific embodiments thereof are shown in the drawings and will be described herein in detail with the understanding that the present disclosure is to be considered as an exemplification of the principles of the invention, as well as the best mode of practicing same, and is not intended to limit the invention to the specific embodiment illustrated.  
         [0027]     Methods and systems which embody the invention provide a standardized, behaviorally based framework for viewing employee diversity level(s) in a business, governmental entity or non-governmental non-profit organization. In this regard, a common language or diversity definition levels, cohesive approaches, and uniform processes can be used to measure and assess past and present levels of diversity. Collected data can be analyzed and plans developed to improve diversity level(s) and/or to address gaps in business organization processes or activities.  
         [0028]     The methods and systems can be based on a multi-level, multi-dimensional (multiple key business characteristics) diversity model. Increasing levels of diversity are expressed in the model in terms of various aspects of selected business characteristics. These characteristics can include, without limitation, commitment of the organization&#39;s leadership to improving diversity within the organization, organizational culture and climate, work force strategy and development, and customer relationship and management.  
         [0029]     Recognizing that organizations can exhibit multiple internal levels of diversity and that the objective is to move toward greater diversity within the organization, a multi-purpose assessment strategy can be used to initially develop global and/or sub-group diversity characteristics of an organization. The model described above, as shown in  FIGS. 1A-1C , illustrates the type of data which might provide insight into current level(s) of diversity within an organization. Various processes for collecting and compiling data are described below.  
         [0030]     A variety of data can be collected and used for assessing the extent of diversity in a business. Collected types of data, without limitation, can include employee opinions, organizational processes and practices (which could be entity-wide or associated with entity sub-groups) intended to implement and support diversity, and available objective data which might provide insight into the effectiveness of such processes and practices.  
         [0031]     Employee opinions can be obtained through the use of confidential surveys which seek responses to questions designed to determine what employees think about the existing organizational (corporate, governmental, or non-profit) work environment and diversity characteristics of the organization. The surveys can, without limitation, be implemented using discrete paper documents designed to be subsequently scanned, or, can be implemented on-line for employees to directly provide information in a machine readable fornat.  
         [0032]     Questions as to organizational processes and practices can be posed to, and answers obtained from, appropriate organizational representatives via scanable documents or on-line. If desired, a peer review process can be incorporated to provide a third party review of such results/answers for purposes of data integrity and verification.  
         [0033]     Finally, objective data can be solicited by posing questions to and/or extracting data from organizational record keepers as to demographics, employee retention and organizational performance relative to statutory and regulatory requirements such as equal opportunity or affirmative action.  
         [0034]     The above described processes can also be used to collect information as to various diversity related business characteristics. These, without limitation, can include leadership commitment, organizational culture and climate, work force strategy and development, as well as customer relationship and management.  
         [0035]     The collected data or information can be processed to obtain various diversity-indicating results, including a global as well as one or more sub-group-related diversity indicating factors or indicia. Such results can be presented in a variety of formats to management. Further, the collected data can be analyzed to locate gaps or areas where process, procedures or the like can be altered to move the organization in the direction of improved or increased level(s) of diversity. Such analysis would preferably be carried out using one or more commercially available data analysis tools.  
         [0036]     The results of such analysis can be used to develop one or more plans to promote enhanced organizational diversity. Those plans can be implemented and subsequently, additional data collected and analyzed to assess their impact on the objective of enhancing organizational diversity (i.e., assess whether improvement in diversity is achieved).  
         [0037]      FIG. 1A  is a diagram of a multi-level, multi-dimensional (multiple business characteristics) diversity model which is applicable, without limitation, to a for-profit business, a non-profit organization, or a governmental entity. Increasing levels of diversity, L 1 , L 2  . . . L n , are illustrated on a horizontal axis vs. selected key business characteristics indicated on a vertical axis. Information shown as LC i , OCC i , WSD i , and CR i , for the respective business characteristics represent aspects of the business organization corresponding to Level L i . Information representative of a level of diversity for a business characteristic, or for an attribute of a business characteristic, is regarded as a definition or indicator of that level for that business characteristic/attribute. Definitions representing degrees of each characteristic correspond to respective levels of diversity. For example, definitions (LC 1  . . . LC n ) corresponding to degrees of Leadership Commitment can be viewed as corresponding to levels (L 1  . . . L n ) of diversity.  
         [0038]     It will be understood that diversity definitions at any one level may vary between organizations. Such variations are not a limitation of the invention. However, in accordance with the invention, level L 2  diversity, however defined, is viewed or regarded as being greater than level L 1  diversity either globally or for a portion of the organization. Similarly, level L 3  diversity, globally or as associated with one of the indicated business characteristics, is greater than level L 2  diversity.  
         [0039]     Charts,  FIGS. 1B and 1C , provide additional information describing key business characteristics with their respective attributes. Those of skill will also understand that the selected business characteristics may vary between organizations. Such variances are not limitations of the invention.  
         [0040]      FIG. 2  illustrates a diversity assessment and enhancement (improvement) process  100  based on a multi-level diversity model, such as the Model  10  of  FIG. 1A . In process  100 , a model such as the Model  10  is developed for use by the organization. Relevant groups of employees  12 , organizational representatives  14 , and suppliers (sources) of objective data  16  are then identified. Each group is requested to provide information in answer to questions posed by predefined surveys or questionnaires  12   a ,  14   a ,  16   a . The information being sought reports aspects of the business organization relating to selected key business characteristics, globally or associated with sub-parts of the organization, as indicated by the Model  10  of  FIG. 1A .  
         [0041]     The resulting data or information  12   b ,  14   b ,  16   b  is compiled and stored in a database  20 . It will be understood by those of skill in the art that the surveys or questionnaires would be prepared, as discussed above, in accordance. with the Model  10 . For example, questions  1   c  and  5   a  ( FIG. 8 ) are prepared in accordance with, and relates to the Leadership Commitment business characteristics of the model ( FIG. 1C - 1 ), particularly to Leadership Participation and Communication, and Supplier Diversity, respectively. Also, a question inquiring about Manager Support of the diversity process (refer to Survey Item  28  of  FIG. 5 ) would be in accordance with level  1  of the model relating to process support associated with the Organization Climate and Culture business characteristic ( FIG. 1C - 2 ) . Questions would be prepared specifically for compiling information, in various forms, that would be relevant to the then current level of diversity of the organization. It will also be understood that neither the nature nor the characteristics of the database  20  are limitations of the invention.  
         [0042]     The collected data is then input to a processor and processed, as shown in step  24 , using a variety of subsequently described techniques or procedures to arrive at one or more diversity ratings for the organization. The diversity ratings are indicative of a current level of diversity for the organization. Following the processing of data, shown in step  24 , one or more reports illustrative of current diversity status of the organization can be produced, as shown in step  28 .  
         [0043]     The input data from database  20 , the diversity ratings produced in step  24  and reports produced in step  28  can then be analyzed, as shown in step  30  to identify gaps between current and desired diversity levels for the respective business characteristics, and to determine or otherwise establish those areas, processes or steps within the organization or sub-part thereof which can be varied to facilitate the movement of the organization from its current diversity level, L i , to the next higher level of diversity L j . Such analysis can preferably be carried out using one or more commercially available data mining or analysis tools.  
         [0044]     It will be understood that neither the specific tool or tools used nor their processing characteristics are limitations of the invention. Representative tools include Microsoft SQL Server, Active Server Pages (ASP), Stored database procedures or Microsoft Excel.  
         [0045]     Following the analysis of the processing results, an action plan may be developed and implemented, as depicted in steps  32  and  34 , to improve the level of diversity of the organization. Thereafter, the process  100  can be carried out again globally or relative to a portion of the organization to assess changes in diversity levels and the extent of improvement.  
         [0046]      FIG. 3  is a chart of additional exemplary information as to the respective data types  12   b ,  14   b ,  16   b  depicted in  FIG. 2 . The processing  24  ( FIG. 2 ) of assessment data ( FIG. 3 ) is directed to producing a global or over-all organizational diversity rating.  
         [0047]     As illustrated in  FIG. 3 , each of the data types  12   b ,  14   b ,  16   b  is assigned a weighting factor  12   c , such as 60%, for employee feedback information  12   b , weighting factor  14   c , such as 40% for business unit self-assessment data  14   b , and weighting factor  16   c  of plus or minus 0.5 for the objective data  16   b . The weighted data can be used in producing an overall diversity rating, step  24 . It will be understood that other weightings come within the spirit and scope of the invention.  
         [0048]      FIG. 4  provides additional exemplary details as to processing step  24  ( FIG. 2 ). Survey responses ( 12   b ) can be assigned a weighting ( 12   c ) of 60% of raw score (i.e., 60% of the survey response values). Business unit self-assessment information ( 14   b ) can be assigned a weighting ( 14   c ) of 40% of raw score. The weighted raw scores are added together to form a raw score ( 24   a ) corresponding to 100% of the inputs  12   b  and  14   b . The total raw score  24   a  can be adjusted with objective data ( 16   b ), as shown in step  16   c , to form a final score ( 24   b ) indicative of a diversity level L i  ( 24   c ). Variations in the above described processing come within the spirit and scope of the invention.  
         [0049]      FIG. 5  illustrates an exemplary employee survey as may be provided to employees (step  12   a  of  FIG. 2 ). It will be understood that the survey of  FIG. 5  discloses the best mode of practicing the invention but is not a limitation thereof. Variations on the survey of  FIG. 5  comes within the spirit and scope of the invention as would be understood by those of skill in the art. The survey results, which might include responses from many employees, can be stored in database  20  for subsequent processing.  
         [0050]     In accordance with step  24  of  FIG. 2 ,  FIG. 6A  illustrates aspects of exemplary processing of survey results for one question from the survey of  FIG. 5 . Exemplary processing  40   a  illustrates that a favorable response to a question, indicating that level  4  was achieved, implies a favorable response to lower levels  1 - 3  for that question.  
         [0051]     Further in accordance with step  24 , as illustrated by processing step  40   b  of  FIG. 6B , raw percent favorable responses for each level below the highest level, Level  5  for example, are combined with implied favorable responses from higher levels to produce a total for each level. Where a 70% exemplary threshold has been established, as indicated in step  40   c , the highest level meeting that criteria is Level  2  for an exemplary question.  
         [0052]     Also in accordance with step  24  of  FIG. 2 ,  FIG. 7  illustrates exemplary processing of survey results—the processing of responses to a plurality of survey questions associated with one of the exemplary business characteristics, depicted, for example, in  FIG. 1A . With respect to exemplary business characteristic No. 1—leadership commitment—,  FIG. 7  illustrates that, for four questions pertaining to that characteristic, the highest level with a 70% favorable achievement (step  42   a ) corresponded to level  2  for questions one and two. Question  3  only had a level  1  response. Question  4  had a level  3  response. The favorably achieved levels were then totaled and divided by the number of questions, step  42   b , to arrive at a survey rating  42   c  for that characteristic. Ratings for other characteristics could be determined similarly.  
         [0053]      FIG. 8  illustrates some exemplary questions, and responses that may be provided by business organizations upon self-assessment. It will be understood that the subject questions might vary in number and subject matter depending on the business characteristics selected. However, they would all be related to the business characteristics of the model ( FIGS. 1A-1C ).  
         [0054]     With respect to the processing shown in  FIG. 9  of the self-assessment results, it may be desirable to conduct a peer review of the results of the self-assessment survey. Such a review could be conducted, for example by an independent team of individuals from other parts of the business or entity.  
         [0055]      FIG. 9  illustrates details of an exemplary business unit self-assessment rating process  210 . The business characteristics (see  FIG. 1A  for example) are evaluated quantitatively (step  212 ) based on results of the peer review of the self-assessment survey (step  214   a ). These results can be assigned level values (step  214   b ) in accordance with table  216 .  
         [0056]     Business characteristics can be qualitatively evaluated (step  218 ) by taking into account the business unit self-assessment  220   a  and the peer review ratings  220   b . The lesser of the business unit&#39;s self-rating and the peer review rating is selected (step  220   c ).  
         [0057]     In step  222  the level indicia, step  214   b , are averaged with the “lesser” rating, step  220   c  to produce an average diversity value for each of the characteristics, step  224 .  
         [0058]      FIG. 10  illustrates exemplary objective data  50 . Objective data  50  can include a plurality of data elements  50   a  and associated metrics  50   b . Data  50   c  represents three sets of assessment data that can be used in combination with relative weights  50   d  to produce an objective data adder within the plus/minus 0.5 range, as shown in step  16   c    
         [0059]      FIG. 11  illustrates, for each of the characteristic types  52   a , exemplary input relative weightings  52   b  and characteristic relative weightings  52   c . The weightings of  FIG. 11  can be used, as illustrated in  FIG. 12 , to carry out an overall diversity level calculation  56 .  
         [0060]      FIG. 12  combines the results of the previously discussed processing ( FIGS. 6A, 6B ,  7 ,  9 - 11 ) to produce an over-all diversity model rating. In this regard, according to  FIG. 12 , processed survey data  56   a  (also shown in  FIGS. 6A, 6B ,  7 ), and processed self-assessment data  56   b  (as disclosed in  FIG. 9  for example), for each of the business characteristics, are combined mathematically with respective weightings in step  56   c  (as shown in  FIG. 11 ), to produce calculated ratings  56   d . The ratings  56   d  are summed to produce a total  56   e  which is in turn adjusted with the processed objective data  56   f  (also shown in  FIG. 10 ), to produce an over-all organizational rating  56   g  indicative of diversity level of the business. It will of course be understood that variations of the above process come within the spirit and scope of the invention.  
         [0061]      FIG. 13A  illustrates a process  200  of assessing and improving a business unit&#39;s diversity level. The diversity level can be established on an over-all basis and/or relative to selected business characteristics shown in  FIGS. 1A-1C . A diversity model, such as the Model  10  of  FIG. 1A  is developed (step  10 - 1   FIG. 13A  as discussed above) along with employee questionnaires, self-assessment questions and subject matter for objective data, step  10 - 1  as discussed above.  
         [0062]     The respective data from the survey,  12   b - 1 , self-assessment  14   b - 1  and objective investigation  16   b - 1  are then obtained. The various types of data are then processed, step  24 - 1   a , to produce business unit diversity indicia  24 - 1   b . Thereafter, the data can be analyzed, step  30 - 1 . The business unit can develop a plan, step  32 - 1 , as shown in  FIGS. 13B-1  to  13 B- 4 , to move to a higher level of diversity, step  32 - 1 , using the results of the analysis and the diversity model. An advisory team can be constituted and made available to assist, step  32 - 2 .  
         [0063]     The business unit action plan can be implemented as shown in step  34 - 1  of  FIG. 13A . The advisory team can provide on-going support and suggestions and identify trends in the previously collected data, step  34 - 2 . A corporate diversity support office can provide additional support and feedback, step  34 - 3 . Subsequently, the process can be repeated.  
         [0064]     Process  300  shown in  FIG. 14  is an alternative representation of processes  100  and  200  ( FIGS. 2 and 13 A), including the steps of compiling new data after implementing the improvement or action plan ( FIG. 13B ), re-assessing the diversity status of the organization and producing another rating, and comparing the ratings from the assessment and re-assessment operations to determine progress, if any, made in diversity.  
         [0065]      FIG. 15  is a block diagram of a system  70  which embodies the invention. The system  70  includes one or more processors  72  coupled to database  20 . Data processing software  74  and analysis software  76  can be executed by processor(s)  72  to carry out the processing and analysis functions in previously discussed methods  100  and  200 , based on data in database  20 . Data such as employee survey results,  12   b , self-assessment information  14   b  and objective data  16   b  can be coupled, via a computer network I, as part of an intranet or an internet, to database  20  for subsequent processing by software  74 ,  76 .  
         [0066]     A display with graphical user interface  80  can be coupled, via network I or directly to processor(s)  72 , and used to graphically present diversity level information, upon processing the data  20 , to management or other personnel. One form of presentation is illustrated by  FIG. 16 .  
         [0067]     The display of  FIG. 16  includes an overall-all level indicium  80   a  (see also  56   g  of  FIG. 12 ).  FIG. 16  also shows indicia  80   b, c, d  an  80   e  corresponding to characteristics such as leadership commitment, organization culture and climate, work force strategy and development, and customer relationship and management. If desired, an objective data indicium  80   f  can also be displayed. It will be understood that other forms of presentation of the respective diversity level indicators come within the spirit and scope of the invention.  
         [0068]     From the foregoing, it will be observed that numerous variations and modifications may be effected without departing from the spirit and scope of the invention. It is to be understood that no limitation with respect to the specific apparatus illustrated herein is intended or should be inferred. It is, of course, intended to cover by the appended claims all such modifications as fall within the scope of the claims.