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.

This study aims to explore the chicken and egg paradox in the taxi e-hailing business contributing to define a condition of system emergence. This paradox is a meaningful one as these platforms represent a system where the passengers systems have no reason to participate if they have no drivers-systems to answer their call, but, at the same time, the platform is not useful to the drivers-system if there are no passengers-systems using the platform.

To understand how this paradox has been dealt with in the taxi e-hailing business, this study focused on a case study on a best practice in Italian taxi e-hailing industry (i.e. MyTaxi/FreeNow). This study wants to comprehend which actions have been implemented to solve this paradox and has tried to identify the interconnections between the various strategies to create a closed loop diagram for further testing.

This study has found that the company did not choose a single “subsystem” (passenger or driver), but it has stimulated the creation of several mutually reinforcing motivation for have both subsystems interact to help the company grow.

To the best of the authors’ knowledge, this paradox has never been studied using the complex adaptive system perspective. This perspective is particularly useful in this case and in the similar ones with several different interacting factors that cannot be really studied without using a higher order perspective.