Search results

Research consistently shows that non-scientific bias, equity, and diversity trainings do not work, and often make bias and diversity problems worse. Despite these widespread failures, there is considerable reason for hope that effective, meaningful DEI efforts can be developed. One approach in particular, the bias habit-breaking training, has 15 years of experimental evidence demonstrating its widespread effectiveness and efficacy.

This article discusses bias, diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) efforts from the author’s perspective as a scientist–practitioner – the author draws primarily on the scientific literature, but also integrates insights from practical experiences working in DEI. The author provides a roadmap for adapting effective, evidence-based approaches from other disciplines (e.g. cognitive-behavioral therapy) into the DEI context and review evidence related to the bias habit-breaking training, as one prominent demonstration of a scientifically-validated approach that effects lasting, meaningful improvements on DEI issues within both individuals and institutions.

DEI trainings fail due to widespread adoption of the information deficit model, which is well-known as a highly ineffective approach. Empowerment-based approaches, in contrast, are highly promising for making meaningful, lasting changes in the DEI realm. Evidence indicates that the bias habit-breaking training is effective at empowering individuals as agents of change to reduce bias, create inclusion, and promote equity, both within themselves and the social contexts they inhabit.

In contrast to the considerable despair and pessimism around DEI efforts, the present analysis provides hope and optimism, and an empirically-validated path forward, to develop and test DEI approaches that empower individuals as agents of change.

Immigrant groups often pursue entrepreneurial endeavors in their new home country. Even though both immigrant entrepreneurship and organizational identity have received scholarly attention, there has been little systematic exploration of identity strategies pursued by immigrant-owned organizations. In this article, we develop a theoretical framework that draws on the concepts of liability of foreignness and social identity theory in the context of immigrant entrepreneurship. Our framework explores how immigrant entrepreneurs may negotiate identities for their firms through the development of specific identity strategies that confirm or underplay their national/ethnic identities in order to survive in their immediate environment. We develop a model that shows how these confirmations or underplaying strategies work both for firms that have an individualistic entrepreneurial orientation, as well as those with a collective/associative entrepreneurial orientation. We also suggest two contextual moderators to this relationship: (1) the image of the founder's country of origin, and (2) the presence of immigrant networks in the host country, which may alter the effectiveness of identity strategies in terms of organizational mortality outcomes.

The Women in Leadership Development (WLD) Initiative is a year-long, multifaceted co-curricular leadership development opportunity created to support the unique developmental needs of emerging women leaders. WLD was intentionally designed around the context of second-generation gender bias with a firm grounding of research and theory on gender and leadership.

Organized around three leadership pathways – leadership training, leadership coaching, and leadership support networks – WLD brings together the best practices of leadership development in combination with feminist pedagogy and critical perspectives to foster meaningful and impactful development of women leaders.

This paper describes the design of the initiative and how each leadership pathway supports the leadership development journey for emerging women leaders. It provides a model that is impactful as well as foundational, for undergraduate women’s leadership development.

Women leaders, in particular, can benefit from leadership development that takes gender into account (DeFrank-Cole & Tan, 2022a; Ely et al., 2011).