Building a Diverse Training Curriculum

In 2016, as I was just finding my footing as a #diversity, #equity, and #inclusion practitioner, I read an article titled, "Why Diversity Programs Fail" and learned that DEI work was not as straightforward as I had thought. From hundreds of interviews and 30 years of data from more than 800 US companies, sociologists Frank Dobbin and Alexandra Kalev found that the usual DEI interventions—mandatory diversity training, job tests, and grievance procedures—tended to REDUCE the representation of women, Black, Latine, and Asian managers. They detailed the unintended consequences of companies that deploy these intiatives: resentment and backlash, double standards, retaliation and more. There are many DEI initiatives and programs that work. Dobbin and Kalev found that programs that drive intergroup contact and draw on people's desire to look good meaningfully increase representation. Other research has found that standardizing hiring processes reduces hiring discrimination, developing competency criteria mitigates bias on promotions outcomes and feedback, designing the workday so people spend more time with others different from them lowers prejudice and increases belonging, and so on. But the $9.4-billion dollar DEI industry didn't get as big as it did by focusing on these evidence-based practices. Change management takes time, money, and coordination, and employers are often leery to take this approach unless forced. Instead, companies opt for one-off initiatives that they can breadcrumb their way toward the bare minimum—interventions that, unfortunately, tend to be either wholly ineffective or activate hostility and resentment that turn the clock back. As a solo practitioner in the late 2010s who was offering precisely the one-time trainings and workshops that were in-demand, this was all overwhelming to me. I knew that in my heart this work was important, but I also wanted my tactics to be effective. If I wasn't actually reducing discrimination, increasing retention, supporting thriving, then I wasn't doing my job properly. If the impact lay in adjacent work—coaching leaders to understand the role they had to play, working alongside HR teams to design standardized processes to mitigate bias, supporting employee resource groups to set better boundaries, designing impact measurement and infrastructure to support long-term behavior change, and so on—then I had to go in those directions. DEI is far from dead, but we can't pretend that the performative pre-backlash status quo was the best we had to offer. As I spoke to Vox in a recent article, this is our moment to double down on our impact, not just good intentions. We can't just aspire to design workplaces that are fair, accessible, inclusive, and representative for all; we have to actually demonstrate success, measurably and tangibly. Anti-DEI activists peddle fear. We beat them with hope—and the proof that we're building a better world for everyone than they could imagine.

Interesting paper to stick your teeth into if you're an L&D, concerned with learning transfer. 💡 The authors reviewed 71 studies to build the so-called COMPASS model, which combines two well-established models: The COM-B model (Capability, Opportunity, Motivation = Behaviour) And Baldwin & Ford's training transfer framework. In a nutshell: The COMPASS model focuses on three key components that influence soft skills transfer: 1️⃣ Trainee characteristics (e.g. prior experience, motivation, and self-efficacy) 2️⃣ Training features (e.g. content relevance, design, delivery, and support) 3️⃣ Work environment (e.g. manager support, team norms, and org culture) The research identified 69 factors influencing behaviour transfer. 🟢 The ones with favourable evidence of impact: On-the-job training Relevance of training Time-spaced training Micro-learning Pre-training materials Training assessment Trainer effectiveness/credibility Multiple instructional methods Use of technology Workshops Goal-setting Mentoring/coaching/supervision 🔵 The ones with emerging evidence of impact: Community of practice Personalization Variability and increasing complexity Facilitation or assistance Feedback Group assignment Observation of others Reflection Role play Lots to chew on, and Sejaal Tilwani made a little overview, including some practice recommendations, in the latest Learning Brief Newsletter: https://lnkd.in/eMrniWs6

Bringing legal action against an employer isn't at the top of a Disabled person's agenda when we apply for a job or when we're in employment. Yet, 90% of corporate Disability Inclusion training, if it even exists, solely focuses on the legal side. "If we don't do this, we'll be taken to court... " It tends not to focus on the individual behind the Disability. Instead, it creates a narrative that the person is a potential risk, not a potential asset to the organisation. I'm not saying we shouldn't educate on legal responsibilities. That would be silly, and your governance teams would come chasing me. But we need to be taking a human-centric approach to our training. So here are some tips for creating a more impactful Disability Inclusion Training: 1. Disability Inclusion training should be mandatory for all employees. That includes your leadership teams. 2. Hire external Disabled trainers or organisations to deliver bespoke training. (Promise that's not a hint). 3. Explore the diversity of Disability. Disability is both visible and non-visible. There is no one experience and no one appearance. 4. You can't create awareness or make change without addressing systemic ableism. Educate about ableist bias, beliefs, behaviours, communication, language, microaggressions, stereotypes... 5. That also includes internalised ableism and health and wellbeing. 6. Adjustments/Accommodations: Go beyond the legal requirement. Educate on how and why these tools and supportive measures create equity. Provide examples of adjustments and signpost access routes. 7. Educate on the models of Disability and the language of each model. 8. Educate colleagues on accessibility. Explore how different barriers impact different individuals. Help them take accountability, show examples. 9. If you're not addressing intersectionality, you need to go back to the drawing board. We can't talk about one piece of a person's identity without acknowledging how other forms of systemic oppressions impact individuals. 10. Make it personal. Invite your Disability Staff Groups/Employee Resource Groups/Networks to either deliver the training or contribute. 11. Explore allyship. Don't just use it as a buzzword. 12. Make colleagues aware of company Disability policies and be sure they're accessible. 13. Accessibility needs to be at the core of this training, not just when creating your deck but also when delivering it. Ensure your deck is accessible and offer to provide it in advance of training. Explain slides in detail as you deliver and be sure to share information in a variety of different ways. 14. Make sure this training is updated and refreshed and always ask for feedback. Image Description: Carousel slide reads Disability Inclusion, Training Tips, go beyond the legal stuff. Five stick persons representing both visible and non-visible disabilities are below. The numbered text above is the slides text #MondayMotivation #DisabilityInclusion #DiversityAndInclusion #NDEAM

„Companies spend millions on antibias training each year in hopes of creating more-inclusive—and thereby innovative and effective—workforces. Studies show that well-managed diverse groups perform better and are more committed, have higher collective intelligence, and excel at making decisions and solving problems. But research also shows that bias-prevention programs rarely deliver“, schreiben Joan C. Williams und Sky Mihaylo in der Harvard Business Review. Statt auf ineffiziente Programme fokussieren die Autorinnen auf Möglichkeiten, die einzelne Führungskräfte in der Praxis haben, um Vorurteilen entgegenzuwirken und Diversität zu verwirklichen. Es beginnt für sie damit, zu verstehen, wie sich Voreingenommenheit im Arbeitsalltag auswirkt, wann und wo ihre verschiedenen Formen tagtäglich auftreten. Das Motto: „You can’t be a great manager without becoming a ‚bias interrupter‘.“  Ihre Empfehlungen gliedern Williams und Mihaylo in drei Hauptpunkte. ▶️ Fairness in hiring: 1. Insist on a diverse pool.  2. Establish objective criteria, define “culture fit” (to clarify objective criteria for any open role and to rate all applicants using the same rubric), and demand accountability.  3. Limit referral hiring.  4. Structure interviews with skills-based questions.    ▶️ Managing Day-to-Day:  Day to day, they should ensure that high- and low-value work is assigned evenly and run meetings in a way that guarantees all voices are heard. 1. Set up a rotation for office housework, and don’t ask for volunteers.  2. Mindfully design and assign people to high-value projects.  3. Acknowledge the importance of lower-profile contributions.  4. Respond to double standards, stereotyping, “manterruption,” “bropriating,” and “whipeating (e.g., majority-group members taking or being given credit for ideas that women and people of color originally offered). 5. Ask people to weigh in. 6. Schedule meetings inclusively (they should take place in the office and within working hours). 7. Equalize access proactively (e.g., if bosses meet with employees, this should be driven by business demands or team needs).   ▶️ Developing your team: Your job as a manager is not only to get the best performance out of your team but also to encourage the development of each member. That means giving fair performance reviews, equal access to high-potential assignments, and promotions and pay increases to those who have earned them. 1. Clarify evaluation criteria and focus on performance, not potential.  2. Separate performance from potential and personality from skill sets.  3. Level the playing field with respect to self-promotion (by giving everyone you manage the tools to evaluate their own performance).  4. Explain how training, promotion, and pay decisions will be made, and follow those rules. „Conclusion: Organizational change is crucial, but it doesn’t happen overnight. Fortunately, you can begin with all these recommendations today.“ #genderequality #herCAREER

⚠️ Warning: Don’t follow the OpenAI prompting advice released yesterday unless you want biased outputs that reinforce gaps between your students. Yesterday, OpenAI released a K12 prompting guide (in comments). It scaffolded ‘okay’, ‘good’ and ‘great’ prompts, and celebrated the success of those labelled as “great”. But there’s nothing to celebrate here. In fact, there’s more to fear. Many of the “great” examples rely on asking GenAI to produce 'engaging activities'. That sounds harmless. But when left open, the word “engaging” brings in all kinds of bias from the training data. Take this example prompt from the guide: “Create a lesson plan for a high school history class on World War II. Include an engaging activity, discussion questions, and suggestions for multimedia resources. Tailor the content for students with a basic understanding of 20th-century history.” The outputs this kind of prompt generates often favour dominant norms: here Western-Centric, neurotypical, gender under-representation, privileged. Thousands of teachers, lecturers and teacher educators are working every day to narrow these gaps in attainment. But vague prompts like “make it engaging” can quietly widen them, unless we know how to guide these tools with care. In my research on physics outputs from GenAI, I’ve started to categorise how this bias appears. It shows in how explanations are framed, who is represented, and which learners are centred. Over the next few weeks, I’ll be sharing a series that explores ten common forms of bias in GenAI lesson outputs, and how we can mitigate against them through more intentional prompting. The topics are: ➡️ Accessibility Bias ➡️ Cognitive Style Bias ➡️ Modality Bias ➡️ Cultural Bias and Western-Centric Defaults ➡️ Identity-Neutral Design ➡️ Participation Bias ➡️ Home Context and Privilege Assumptions ➡️ Gender Bias and Role Stereotypes ➡️ Neurodiversity Bias ➡️ Teacher-Centric Power Dynamics These patterns affect more than just content. They shape who feels seen, supported and challenged in the learning process. ⬇️ Check out my simple analysis of bias in OpenAI's recommended 'great' prompt - link in comments. If you have examples, experiences or questions, please drop them in the comments or message me directly, so we can build this set of mitigations together as educators.

👩🦰 Designing Accessibility Personas (https://lnkd.in/evVnB4hd). How to embed accessibility and test for it early in the design process ↓ We often assume that digital products are merely that — products. They either work or don’t work. That they help people meet their needs or fail on their path to get there. But every product has its own embedded personality. It can be helpful or dull, fragile or reliable, supportive or misleading. When we design it, willingly or unwillingly, we embed our values, views and perspectives into it. Sometimes it’s meticulously shaped and refined. And sometimes it’s simply random. And when that happens, users assign their perception of the product’s personality to the product instead. Products are rarely accessible by accident. There must be an intent that captures and drives accessibility efforts in a product. And the best way to do that is by involving people with temporary, situational and permanent disabilities into the design process. One simple way of achieving that is by inviting people with disabilities in the design process. For that, we could recruit people via tools like Access Works or UserTesting, ask admins of groups and channels on accessibility to help, or drop an email to non-profits that work in accessibility space. Another way is establishing accessibility personas for user journeys. Consider them as user profiles that highlight common barriers faced by people with particular conditions and provide guidelines for designers and engineers on how to design and build for them. E.g. Simone, a dyslexic user, or Chris, a user with rheumatoid arthritis. For each, we document known challenges and notable considerations, designing training tasks for designers and developers and instructions to simulate experience through the lens of these personas. By no means does it replace proper accessibility testing, but it creates a shared understanding about what the experiences are like. You can build on top of Gov.uk’s profound research project (https://lnkd.in/evVnB4hd) — it also explains how to set up devices and browsers, so that each persona has their own browser profile. Once you do, you can always switch between them and simulate an experience, without changing settings every single time. All Accessibility Personas (+ Tasks, Research, Setup) https://lnkd.in/evVnB4hd Accessibility doesn’t have to be challenging if it’s considered early. No digital product is neutral. Accessibility is a deliberate decision, and a commitment. Not only does it help everyone; it also shows what a company believes in and values. And once you do have a commitment, and it will be much easier to retain accessibility, rather than adding it last minute as a crutch — because that’s where it’s way too late to do it right, and way too expensive to make it well. [Useful pointers in the comments ↓] #ux #accessibility

Lots of organisations are trialling Microsoft Copilot, but few share the results. Vendors provide glowing case studies, but what about the mixed ones? That’s why I was excited to see a public study from the Office of Digital Government Western Australia. It was more nuanced than the usual rose-tinted vendor stories, offering valuable insights into AI adoption, raising questions about implementation strategies the rest of us can learn from 5,765 licenses deployed: solid sample size for a robust trial 33% adoption rate: Decent for a new, little-understood workplace technology, but hardly transformative The primary use? Summarising meetings & drafting—important but isolated tasks that lack the integration needed for broader impact. Copilot is doing work that might otherwise not get done, but it’s not yet the game-changer AI could be Observations: Limited integration: Meeting summaries and drafts are isolated activities. Without connecting tools to broader workflows, the potential for transformative value is lost Lack of process analysis: A comprehensive process review was recommended but appears not to have been done. Dropping tools into workflows without context limits ROI Adoption gaps: Why did only 33% adopt when meetings are universal? Barriers—technical, cultural, or support-related—likely played a role Training matters: People who undertook more than one type of training (eg workshops, peer learning, self-paced modules) showed much higher adoption rates. Varied, ongoing training is essential to building confidence and capability Technical limitations: Issues with Excel & Outlook and inaccuracies hurt productivity. Familiarity bias toward enterprise platforms like Microsoft might not always serve users best Prompt engineering struggles: Challenges with prompts suggest gaps in training or change management rather than tool design Over-reliance risks: Concerns about losing deep knowledge are valid. Organisations must balance efficiency with accountability and critical thinking Early adopter bias: Early users were perceived as more productive, which may foster resistance or fear—a common hurdle in change management If you’re planning a trial: Invest in varied training: Training shouldn’t be a one-off. Use diverse formats and reinforce adoption over time Choose fit-for-purpose tools: Don’t default to familiar vendors. Smaller, more agile tools can often deliver better results Conduct a discovery phase: A thorough process review ensures tools align with organisational needs, reducing risks and maximising ROI Set clear metrics: Measure costs, benefits, and adoption outcomes to guide experimentation and ensure accountability If your organisation is running a Copilot trial, or considering one, these steps can help you maximise success. And of course, you can always come talk to us at Lithos Partners. You knew that, right? Have you worked with AI tools like Copilot? I’d love to hear your experiences or tips for successful adoption.

As a first in family student, stepping into university life (many, many years ago) felt daunting. I didn’t know the ‘rules’ or the language, and I carried around a quiet fear that I didn’t quite belong. Over time, I found that sense of belonging, largely through my experience living on campus in student accommodation. It was there that I built friendships, found mentors, and slowly came to understand that belonging isn’t something you either have or don’t have, it’s something that can be nurtured. That's why this recent research on student belonging resonated with me. It moves beyond the usual talking points and gets to the heart of what really helps students feel they belong, especially those from underrepresented backgrounds. A few actions that stood out as both meaningful and at times overlooked: 1️⃣ Connecting students to purpose and identity Academic success isn’t just about essays and exams. When we value lived experience and non-traditional learning, students feel seen. We can do this by asking students to reflect on real-world challenges in assessments or connecting learning to their own contexts.   2️⃣ Prioritising relationship-building in the curriculum and throughout Not just during orientation, but throughout the semester via peer mentoring, collaborative problem solving in class, and structured opportunities for students to connect meaningfully with one another. 3️⃣ Making uncertainty visible Students often think they’re the only ones struggling - tutors and academics can and should talk openly about academic challenges, and leaders can acknowledge that confidence and learning those unwritten 'rules' builds over time. Staff who share their own learning journeys can have a huge impact and kindness, respect and genuine interest can go a long way.   4️⃣ Designing for diverse student needs and barriers Not all students want, or are able, to join clubs or attend social events due to work, caring responsibilities, or other factors. Offering flexible, low-barrier opportunities to connect (like online forums or drop-in chats), designing learning experiences with multiple ways to engage, and considering time-poor or commuter students in planning should be non-negotiables. As this article highlights, belonging doesn’t come from a single program, initiative or activity – and it isn’t one size-fits-all. It comes from hundreds of small cues that tell a student: You matter. You’re capable. You are welcome here. Because of this, all staff, can play a key role in facilitating micro-moments of connection. 🔗 Read the full article: https://lnkd.in/ghTeHkxg

Trainers must be more than experts— Here's the secret to delivering impactful training sessions, no matter what comes your way. As a trainer, being prepared for instant changes in the delivery of any concept requires a flexible and adaptive mindset. Here are key strategies to help you stay prepared: 1. Thorough Subject knowledge - 📕 Master the content so well that you can break it down or present it in multiple ways, adapting to the audience’s needs. This will allow you to explain complex ideas in simpler terms or delve deeper if required. 2. Audience Analysis - 🧐 Before the session, understand your audience's knowledge level, learning preferences, and possible challenges. This will help you anticipate where you might need to adjust your delivery. 3. Create a Session Outline - 📝 Have a structured outline that allows for adjustments. Include different examples, analogies, and activities so that you can switch methods if needed. 4. Plan for Flexibility 🧘 - Build in buffer time to the session plan, allowing you to address questions or revisit concepts without rushing. Be prepared to cut less essential content if time constraints arise. 5. Use Interactive Methods 🗣️ - Include interactive methods such as Q&A, group discussions, or problem-solving activities. These allow you to gauge understanding and shift the delivery based on immediate feedback. 6. Technology Familiarity - 🧑💻 Know the tools and platforms you are using so you can quickly adapt, whether it’s changing slides, moving between resources, or using multimedia to reinforce concepts. 7. Stay Calm and Confident ☺️ - If a change in delivery is necessary, remain calm and composed. Confidence reassures the audience, and maintaining a positive attitude will help you navigate unexpected changes smoothly. 8. Prepare Backup Plans 🖋️ - Have alternative examples, exercises, or activities ready in case the original approach does not resonate with the group. 9. Stay Current 🏃 - Keep up with the latest trends, tools, and methods in training and your field of expertise. This allows you to bring fresh perspectives and solutions to any spontaneous situation. 10. Gather Feedback ✍️ - After a session, ask for feedback to understand where adjustments were successful or where improvements are needed. This helps in refining your ability to adapt in future sessions. Being prepared for changes is about blending preparation with flexibility and having the confidence to switch gears when necessary. #confidence #trainthetrainer #training #softskills #leadership #communication #learning

For the past 10 months, I’ve been working undercover in quality assurance for a company, to see if their disability awareness training is making a real difference. I can’t name the company or the service, but from today’s “secret” experience, I can tell you this: disability awareness training delivered by people with lived experience changes the game. Six months ago, the trainer with lived experience left, and standard training took over. The impact was immediate and stark. Today, I sampled six experiences. In only two of them did I feel like a person and a valued customer. The other four left me feeling like an inconvenience—a wheelchair they had to figure out, rather than a person to serve. When the trainer with lived experience was in charge, the focus was on people, skills, and service—then on needs. But without that lived experience at the centre of training, the approach quickly reverts to seeing problems to fix rather than people to welcome. So, if you’re in charge of training and development, insist on including people with lived experience. It’s the difference between box-ticking and real, human-centred inclusion. #DisabilityInclusion #LivedExperience #InclusiveTraining #Accessibility #DisabilityAwareness #HumanCentredDesign #CustomerService #QualityAssurance #InclusionMatters #InclusiveLeadership #TrainingAndDevelopment