The Women's Power and Influence Index: Early Reaction to an Equity Ranking
Written by: Esete Amare, Alexis Devries, Shania Lee, and Sydney Holly
Abstract
​
The following paper builds upon version one of The Women’s Power and Influence Index (WPI). The WPI Index is a product created by The Difference Engine, a center at ASU, to address gender inequality in the workplace. The WPI Index ranks Fortune 500 companies on various criteria and releases the information to the public in an easy-to-understand manner. Following the first release in 2021, we aim to help the WPI Index continue to grow by researching social movements that can inspire the Index, suggesting additional criteria for version 1.5, and raising awareness through events and social media. Part I of the paper details how social movements have utilized social pressure and social media to create broad change, setting the stage for the WPI Index’s public rankings to incentivize change. Part II provides research on new criteria we propose to be added to the Index for the next release. Lastly, part III covers how we used Tik Tok, events, and partnerships to help the Index gain notoriety. Altogether the paper suggests new directions and provides scientific research to further the goals of the WPI Index.
​
​
​
​
Criteria 4: Recruitment Efforts
Recruitment efforts, or recruiting, refer to identifying, attracting, and hiring qualified candidates to fill vacant positions within an organization (SmartRecruiters). It involves various activities, such as job posting, candidate screening, interviewing, and selection, to identify the best fit for a particular role. A fair and diverse recruitment system ensures that all candidates, regardless of background, are given equal opportunities to apply and compete for job positions. It helps organizations to attract candidates from diverse backgrounds, including different races, genders, ages, religions, sexual orientations, disabilities, and more. Forbes says a diverse workforce can bring different perspectives, ideas, and experiences, enhancing the organization's creativity, innovation, and problem-solving (Forbes). A fair recruitment system helps organizations demonstrate their commitment to EEO principles and comply with legal and ethical requirements related to hiring practices (EEOC, 2009). It reduces the risk of discriminatory practices and potential legal liabilities, such as lawsuits and fines, that may arise from unfair or biased recruitment processes. Organizations with a reputation for diverse recruitment practices are more likely to attract top talent (Harvard Business Review, 2019). Candidates increasingly evaluate an organization's commitment to diversity and inclusion when considering job opportunities. A fair and diverse recruitment system can enhance an organization's employer brand and reputation, increasing interest from a wider pool of qualified candidates. When employees perceive that the recruitment process is fair and unbiased, it can boost their morale, engagement, and commitment to the organization. It can also help prevent employee turnover, low morale, and reduced productivity.
​
Recruitment Efforts: An Overview of Definition & Semantics. WPI defines recruitment efforts as a “written commitment to attracting women to open positions.” While a commitment is a great start, this does not equate to a fair hiring process. Starbucks received a 1 for stating, “At least 40% BIPOC representation and 55% women in all retail roles, by 2025 in the U.S,” even though it states no plans on how they will achieve these goals. The Index must define what is necessary for a written commitment, and keep a record of if they mentor people from the outside, talk to high school/college students, and participate in community development. Unfair hiring is not easily detectable from outside of the company. The Women’s Power and Influence Index can try to gather exact stats of what percent of women are in the company and at what levels. If a company makes a commitment, we need explicitly stated steps or evidence of progress. The only issue is that this information is often not widely available, so we are hoping the index will encourage more companies to be more upfront with the public about their recruiting efforts.
​
Recruitment Efforts Suggestion 1: Score on Actions, Not Promise. While many companies have publicly committed to improving practices within their organizations, there are concerns that some may be using buzzwords like diversity and inclusion to avoid accountability
for making actual change. For example, Google was sued by multiple former employees who alleged that the company had a pattern of gender discrimination, despite publicly committing to improving diversity and inclusion (HRD, 2022). Similarly, Wells Fargo’s CEO was criticized for making insensitive remarks about race, despite publicly committing to increasing diversity and inclusion in its workforce (Forbes, 2022). These cases highlight the importance of holding companies accountable for their commitments to diversity and inclusion and of ensuring that they follow through on their promises. It is not enough for companies to simply make statements about diversity and inclusion; they must also take concrete steps toward improvement and demonstrate a real commitment to creating equitable workplaces.
​
How Action Plans Fit On the Index. According to the data on the index, only 12 out of 30 companies have stated specific actions they will take to improve and diversify their recruiting efforts. Based on the examples of companies making promises and not keeping them, the Women’s Power and Influence Index needs to make action statements a requirement for version 1.5. Companies that do not only state goals but also criteria for achieving them deserve to be recognized so that this can become a standardized practice. The keywords or phrases that the index can track are diverse representation, recruit, hire, train, and promote women. Future versions of the index should look back on what commitments businesses made in the past and hold companies accountable if they didn’t reach them.
Recruitment Efforts Suggestion 2: Public Reporting. Companies need to report publicly on the number of women at what organizational levels. From the beginning, women are already the minority, with less than half of all workers. Then as the pyramid builds, it only gets worse and worse. The higher the company’s position, the more pay, the more work, and the more value means, the more women disappear from the chart. Catalyst reported on a study done in the US, UK, and Canada on women’s struggles to reach leadership in business. “Women report that stereotypes and preconceptions about women’s roles and abilities are the No. 1 barrier to advancement, closely followed by lack of role models, general management experience, commitment to family and personal responsibilities, and lack of mentoring.” Without the necessary resources and opportunities, we can’t expect women to be treated equally and succeed. “For the class of 2016–2017, women earned more than half of bachelor’s degrees (57.3%), master’s degrees (59.4%), and doctorate degrees (53.3%)... In the same year, women earned just over half (50.7%) of all professional degrees,” as stated in the article “Females in the US Workforce.” This means there is no excuse for women’s discrimination based on their educational background or experience (Catalyst, 2022). Yet, they are still considered inferior to men with the same qualifications in the business world. “Women struggle to get hired and to ascend the corporate ladder; in one study, men were promoted at a rate of 2.2 to 3 percentage points higher than women. When women surge into a given field, pay tends to drop, as if women were some industry-wide reputational pollutant” (The Atlantic, 2018). This further shows that corporations do not value their female employees as much as their male ones. We can work toward a solution by having more female role models. If women don’t have role models, they are less confident in their abilities. Young women need to see more women in power to feel inspired instead of discouraged.
How Public Reporting Fits On the Index. Only 3 out of 30 corporations on the index state current reports on what percentage of women they have in their company. The companies who did report were Kraft Heinz (37% women in management), Target (around 50% women employees, increased promotion of women by 17%, and promotion of women of color doubled), and AIG (executive team over 40% diverse). Adding this as a criteria requirement in 1.5 will encourage more employers to release their numbers to the public. A key word in this category is “percent” or the % sign, but the scorer must make sure they are only counting active stats and not stat promises.
​
Criteria 5: Childcare Benefits
Childcare benefits are “employer-provided childcare or dependent care assistance, is a benefit where the employer covers part or all of an employee’s childcare costs” (Cusick et al, 2018, p.1). Child Care benefits include, but are not limited to onsite care, paid leave, childcare subsidies, and dependent care assistance programs. Some child care options most popularly offered across companies are onsite daycare, before and after-school programs, and summer camp. It is important to note that many companies that offer childcare benefits noted that benefits were only offered to full-time employees. Additionally, employees, especially women in the workforce, cited childcare benefits as necessary in the workforce, with events such as the COVID-19 pandemic exposing and exacerbating shortages in childcare options (El-Bawab, 2021, p.1). Employees also noted a lack of affordable childcare as a significant obstacle in the workforce. According to McKinsey’s American Opportunity Survey, 39% of survey respondents who make less than $50,000 stated that they could afford childcare for their children (Dua, 2021, p.2). In cases where parents do not have access to childcare, whether due to cost or company facilitation, parents, specifically mothers who still bear a large majority of child-raising responsibilities, are required to compromise work in order to take care of their children.
​
Economic Impact of Affordable Childcare. Offering accessible, affordable, and comprehensive childcare benefits for employees is vital to employee fulfillment and overall company success. According to UNICEF, “family-friendly policies pay off in healthier, better-educated children, greater gender equality and sustainable growth; they are linked to better workforce productivity and the ability to attract, motivate and retain employees” (UNICEF). For over 50 years in Nordic countries, family-friendly policies have been associated with increased women in the workforce and even boosted national GDPs per capita by 10-20 percent. By implementing comprehensive childcare policies, that specifically include “gender-neutral parental policies”, companies are able to combat the “mommy tax”, which places an inequitable burden of domestic care on women. Cusick even finds that childcare benefits are found to “decrease absenteeism, increase overall job satisfaction, enhance employee retention, and strengthen employee commitment to their job” (Cusick, 2018, p.1). Investing in family-friendly, gender-neutral child care benefits is good for women and families in the workforce, and directly affects female employee retention, which inevitably improves key issues like the gender pay gap, gender parity, and economic productivity.
Overall, companies appear to be increasing childcare options and have even begun to include diverse families (families outside of the heteronormative, nuclear family) in the discourse surrounding dependent care. Some companies have even begun to partner with organizations, such as Bright Horizons Family Center, to provide accessible onsite childcare options as well as day care and before and after school care. By increasing childcare benefits, companies are also increasing holistic support for parent employees and families.
​
Childcare Benefits Definition and Semantics on the Index. Currently on the WPI, childcare benefits are scored on a binary, and companies are given a score for having some sort of policy. Keywords and phrases such as “care partner,” “subsidized care,” “unsubsidized care,” “paid time off,” “center-based care,” “in-home care,” “reimbursement,” and “dependent care” are typically indicative of companies having child care benefits. However, some companies include policies where employees have access to flexible schedules and additional compensation to assist in childcare services. For example, Biogen’s policy included thorough details discussing everything from subsidized dependent care, onsite facilities, adoption fee reimbursement, and received a score of 1. On the other hand, American Tower vaguely mentioned childcare resources and also received a score of one.
Unlike other criteria on the index, childcare benefits are broader in that a multitude of terms can indicate the presence or absence of childcare benefits within a company. Additionally, some benefits, such as subsidized on-site care, are found to have more impact and benefits than unsubsidized care or unpaid time off (Cusick, 2018, p.1). In order to account for the numerous differences among childcare benefit policies, it is necessary to develop delineating subcriteria. lIn future versions of the reason, we should assign sub-criteria and score based on sub-criteria. For example, WPI version 1.5 should first check if the company offers childcare benefits and then distinguish between subsidized and unsubsidized childcare benefits.
​
Criteria 6: Caregiver PTO
Caregiver PTO is paid time off offered to full-time employees for caregiving and other familial responsibilities. According to the Center for American Progress, research demonstrates that men and women alike, across diverse demographics, “support a comprehensive program to provide paid family and medical leave to assist with family caregiving or personal medical needs” (Lessler et al, 2017, p.1). Although both men and women support an increase in caregiver compensation options, women provide a majority of care to family members, friends, and community members (Mutschler, 2015, p.1). As discussed by the Family Caregiving Alliance, 66% of caregivers are female, and “female caregivers may spend as much as 50% more time providing care than male caregivers”. The Alliance also found that the amount of unpaid care women provide is worth more than 140 billion dollars. In the earlier report published by the Center for American Progress, a lack of paid time off and general work-family inaction cost the American economy $20.6 billion annually.
​
Caregiving and Paid Family Leave in the United States. In the “Caregiving in the United States 2020” report conducted by the AARP and the National Alliance for Caregiving, one in five Americans (about 48 million people) reported providing unpaid care to another health-compromised or disabled adult (AARP, 2020, p.2). The aforementioned group also devoted over 20 hours a week to caregiving, and three in five unpaid caregivers balance full-time jobs with their caretaking responsibilities. The AARP and National Alliance for Caregiving cite that over 65,000 people become caregivers daily and predict that caregiving demands will only increase as the aging population increases (with a noted 17 percent increase in adults 65 and older between 2015 and 2021). Due to increases in both the aging population and reported an increase in time spent caregiving, there is an increase in the discourse surrounding paid caregiver leave on both the state and federal levels. As of February 2023, the federal government does not mandate paid time off for employees (both full-time and part-time).
​
Federal and State Level Caregiving Efforts. Currently, the only federal policy that ensures access to time off for caregiving is the Family Medical Leave Act (FMLA). Passed in 1993, the Family Medical Leave Act provides employees with full-time status of up to 12 weeks of unpaid leave in 12 months. Furthermore, the Biden Administration’s Build Back Better Act would ensure that working adults have access to paid family and medical leave (Congressional Budget Office, 2021, p.1). However, the act is currently stalled in Congress, and the Congressional Budget Office “expects that most employers who currently provide fewer weeks of leave and less pay during leave.”
On the state level, seven states and D.C. currently have “government-mandated family leave insurance programs in effect” (Holmes, 2023, p.1). Another four states have adopted similar policies that will go into effect within the next two to three years. In all state policies, employers are granted paid time off to care for relatives with “serious health conditions” bond with newly born children. Some states even include military deployment, harassment, sexual assault recovery, and domestic violence within the threshold of caregiver PTO. For example, in California, employees can receive up to 70 percent of their weekly income (up to $1620 a week) for up to eight weeks within a year to care for an ill relative. In contrast, Connecticut offers up to $840 a week for up to 12 weeks a year for a seriously ill family member or someone whose close association is equivalent to a familial relationship with the employee. Although fourteen states have taken steps to increase access to paid leave for caregivers, a large majority of the United States have not implemented policies to address this significant shortage, which leaves the responsibility of paid time off in the hands of companies.
Caregiver PTO on Definition and Semantics on the Index. In the 1.0 version of the WPI, companies are assigned a score of one if they have a policy that exceeds federal government mandates. Key terms that indicate the presence of caregiver PTO are “paid leave,” “paid time off,” “parental leave,” “flexible,” “fully subsidized,” and “unpaid leave.” On the current version of the index, companies are receiving a score for having a policy. Both Biogen and Accenture receive a score of 1 in caregiver PTO, but their policy has striking differences. Accenture states that employees receive up to 16 paid maternity leave, eight weeks paid time off for primary caregivers, and two weeks for secondary caregivers but does not mention the level of compensation. On the other hand, Biogen offers a comprehensive and clearly outlined paid time off compensation package of up to $10,000 for employees.
Considerations for Future Versions of the Index. Within the current version of the index, some companies significantly exceed government mandates and provide comprehensive caregiver policies. However, some companies do not thoroughly outline compensation options or consider the many situations in which an employee would need to use their PTO. Some companies include maternity leave in their caregiver PTO benefits, whereas others provide it as a separate category. The index can account for caregiver PTO semantics' broadness by including additional subcriteria.
​
Criteria 7: Health benefits.
Health benefits are simply defined as “The health care items or services covered under a health insurance plan.” by HealthCare.gov or described as “A group health plan is an employee welfare benefit plan established or maintained by an employer or by an employee organization (such as a union), or both, that provide medical care for participants or their dependents directly or through insurance, reimbursement, or otherwise.” by the U.S Department of Labor. Both definitions mentioned health insurance as a part of health benefits but did not include the specifics of the insurance. The U.S. Department of Labor also mentioned a “benefit plan established or maintained by an employer or by an employee” provides liberty for companies to shape their health benefits however they want. Health benefits of a company whether it is a small one or a large corporation usually include paid time off, health insurance, health insurance, dental coverage, vision coverage, retirement benefits, disability coverage, childcare benefits, health programs, and workplace benefits (Health Consultants Group, 2021). Although this covers just what is expected from companies, however, there are no gender-specific health benefits other than childcare benefits.
Roe v. Wade was recently overturned on June 24, 2022, by The Supreme Court, after nearly 50 years. As a result, abortions are now banned in 18 states. Although it did not affect the whole nation, it sparked further disagreements and conflicts between the people (Planned Parenthood, 2022). Getting abortions is now considered a controversy, and there is a stigma behind it. Women are shamed every day for choosing to get an abortion instead of keeping the child. In return, this also affects how companies mold their health benefits. However, there is a current US federal law called The Affordable Care Act, also known as Obamacare, that protects low-income individuals and families by requiring insurance plans to cover health benefits, including preventative services such as birth control, counseling, well-woman visits, breast and cervical screenings and more (Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (ASPA), 2022). The EEOC also prohibits any discrimination towards women because of pregnancy, childbirth, or any related medical conditions (EEOC). Recently, current president Biden signed the Fiscal Year 2023 Omnibus Spending Bill that includes the Pregnant Workers Fairness Act (PWFA) that goes into effect on June 27, 2023. The Law ensures that employers provide reasonable accommodations to a worker who is pregnant, went through childbirth, or has any related medical condition (EEOC).
​
Health benefits: Definition and Semantics. Currently, the criteria is scored based on the existence of gender-related health benefits. This is a good start in scoring because many companies do not include gender-specific health care plans. The keywords and phrases that are accessed during the scoring process are: “childcare subsidy,” “maternity leave,” “employment status,” “preventative services,” and “women’s health insurance.” Companies would be scored just based on mentioning any of those keywords and phrases. For example, Citigroup scored an index of one on the health benefits criteria due to their several health benefits, such as backup childcare, 16 weeks of paid maternal leave, four weeks of paternity leave, and fertility treatments.
​
Health Benefits: On the Index. On the Women’s Power Index, 22 of 30 companies do have substantial health benefits for their female employees, such as fertility services, maternal and paternal, and pregnancy services. The companies include Biogen, Citigroup, Union Pacific, Disney, Airbnb, NVIDIA, Target, PayPal, Meta, Google, Amazon, Starbucks, Microsoft, Netflix, eBay, Apple, Intel, Adobe, Pepsi Co, Verizon, CVS, and Salesforce. Amazon stood out due to its health benefits of providing equal health coverage for transgender individuals with services such as gender reassignment surgeries and hormone therapy (Jarrett, 2021). Furthermore, Google provides a Medical Advocacy Program for their transgender employees and also partners with the Transgender Law Center to develop a comprehensive health insurance plan for transgender employees (Google; Admin, 2015). It was found that equity and gender principles for guiding the transformation of health financing are “continuity, coherence, and portability across schemes,” “Accountability towards universality, equity, and non-discrimination,” “Valuing unpaid care and childbearing,” and “Updated and evidence-based design and monitoring” (Vijayasingham et al., 2020).
​
Criteria 8: Harassment and Discrimination Training
Harassment and discrimination training is unlike the other criteria on the index. Many companies will have some sort of harassment or discrimination policy but fall short on having clearly outlined harassment and discrimination training policies. According to United States federal and state laws, employers are sometimes required and/or strongly encouraged to “make appropriate efforts to properly train employees, take remedial corrective actions, and prevent any form of workplace harassment and discrimination” (EEOC, 2017, p.1). California, Connecticut, Delaware, Illinois, Maine, and New York are the states that currently have statutes that require sexual harassment training. Other states are “strongly encouraged”; however, harassment and discrimination are both broad terms, making it challenging to qualify what training is sufficient and productive toward achieving gender equity in the workplace.
​
Harassment and Discrimination Training on the Index. On the 1.0 version of the index, companies score 1 for having some sort of harassment and discrimination training policy. Keywords and phrases that may be indicative of a harassment and discrimination policy are “race,” “bias,” “equity,” “sexual harassment,” “training,” “diversity,” “inclusion,” and “discrimination.” In all of the companies listed by the index, only one company, Biogen, mentions a refresher course or refresher training option. In contrast, Microsoft's lengthy policy states, “we ask employees and managers to learn and practice skills that create a more diverse and inclusive workplace. This often sparks difficult but crucial conversations that can challenge our fundamental view of ourselves and bring new awareness of others”. Both companies received a one on the index; however, Microsoft does not discuss the extent to which employees are trained and instead focuses more on voluntary behavior exhibited by employees.
​
Future Considerations for Future Versions of Index. Future versions of the index should explore some questions when looking at the quality and impact of a company's harassment and discrimination training policy: Is one training sufficient? If a company fulfills the government-mandated training, is that enough for a one score on the index? Does it make a difference if the training was provided in-house or by a 3rd party facilitator? These questions allow us to review if the training is actually creating a safer work environment for women employees, especially when considering an issue that is as widespread as harassment and discrimination in the workplace.
​
Criteria 9: Harassment Policy
According to the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) harassment is defined as “a form of employment discrimination that violates Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Age Discrimination in Employment Act of 1967, (ADEA), and the Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990, (ADA)” (U.S. EEOC, n.d.b). In simpler terms, harassment includes discrimination based on factors like race, gender, age, sex, and disability (U.S. EEOC, n.d.b). Harassment is considered to be illegal when “enduring the offensive conduct becomes a condition of continued employment” or “the conduct is severe or pervasive enough to create a work environment that a reasonable person would consider intimidating, hostile, or abusive” (U.S. EEOC, n.d.b). Another form of harassment is retaliatory, which occurs when victims experience harassment as a result of “filing a discrimination charge; for testifying or participating in any way in an investigation, proceeding, or lawsuit; or for opposing employment practices that they reasonably believe discriminate against individuals” (Becton et al., 2017, p. 102).
Studies show just how prevalent the issue of workplace harassment truly is. Between 2018-2021 the EEOC received “98,411 charges alleging harassment under any basis and 27,291 charges alleging sexual harassment” (U.S. EEOC, 2022). Of these general harassment charges, 78.2% were filed by women. Furthermore, 62.2% of the sexual harassment charges were also filed by women (U.S. EEOC, 2022). A multitude of studies on sexual harassment reveal that “anywhere from almost a quarter to more than eight in ten women experience it in their lifetimes” (Shaw et al., 2018). Given that such a high percentage of employees, mainly women, experience harassment in the workplace, it is important that companies have effective policies to prevent this issue.
​
Harassment Policy: Overview of Definition & Semantics. In terms of harassment policy, the WPI describes this criterion as explicitly defined policies against sexual harassment and the existence of anti-harassment policies that address verbal, physical, sexual, and psychological harassment and violence. In version 1.5 of the WPI Index, we want to examine the quality of company harassment policies and further define what these policies should include, according to research. Of the 34 companies surveyed on the WPI Index, only two companies, Netflix and Costco, did not have a harassment policy publicly available. We also found that harassment policies varied greatly in terms of content. For example, ConocoPhillips states, “ConocoPhillips is committed to providing a workplace free of discrimination and one where all employees are treated fairly and with respect” (ConocoPhillips, n.d.b, p. 7). However, other companies like Biogen and PepsiCo take their policies a step further by stating that they cover all legally protected classes and outlispecificallyfic prohibited behaviors (Biogen, n.d.; PepsiCo, n.d., p. 15). In our research regarding harassment in the workplace, we aim to discover which information is most important to include in an effective company policy.
​
Harassment Policy Suggestion 1: A Clear & Visible Policy. The EEOC recommends that company harassment policies clearly delineate prohibited conduct. For example, “offensive jokes, slurs, epithets or name-calling, physical assaults or threats, intimidation, ridicule or mockery, insults or put-downs, offensive objects or pictures, and interference with work performance” (U.S. EEOC, n.d.b) are all examples of harassment that companies should outline in their policies according to the EEOC. Becton et al. (2017) also adds that companies should provide information about the different modalities of harassment, including cyberbullying, sexualized hazing, or social-media harassment (p. 104). Furthermore, Becton et al. (2017) recommends that companies should express who is protected under their harassment policy (p. 104). According to the EEOC, protected classes include discrimination based on “race, color, religion, sex (including pregnancy, sexual orientation, or gender identity), national origin, age (40 or older), disability and genetic information (including family medical history)” (U.S. EEOC, n.d.b). With detail about who is protected and what actions are prohibited, employees will know exactly what behaviors to avoid and report. Becton et al. (2017) even suggests describing specific scenarios involving prohibited behaviors in a company’s harassment policy to make it even clearer what not to do (p. 104).
Furthermore, research recommends that harassment policies should be both highly visible and comprehensible. In order to be effective, anti-harassment policies must be written in a manner that can be easily understood by all employees at the appropriate reading level while also accounting for language differences (Becton et al., 2017, p. 104). McDonald et al. (2015) emphasizes the importance of policy visibility by saying, “policies on SH should be widely known, with open and visible statements that harassment will not be tolerated widely disseminated in public workspaces” (p. 44). The EEOC recommends that the policy be posted “in conspicuous locations throughout the facility, including the agency's website, and incorporated into employee orientation materials/handbooks” (U.S. EEOC, n.d.a). Becton et al. (2017) suggests that employers check in with employees to determine whether or not they received and understand the company’s harassment policy and its implications (p. 103-4).
How A Clear & Visible Policy Fits On The Index. 18 of the 32 companies currently ranked on our Index gave additional information about who is protected or what is prohibited within their harassment policy. Both the EEOC and researchers highlight the importance of having a clear, visible, and understandable harassment policy; therefore, this criterion should be included in version 1.5 of the WPI Index. Companies who provide information on protected classes and activities should receive positive marks for doing so, rewarding them for meeting our researched standard. While companies may vary in how they word their harassment policies, making key terms less obvious, the list of protected classes and prohibited behaviors provided by the EEOC can be utilized to score companies against this criterion. Lastly, in terms of measuring the visibility and understandability of a company’s harassment policy, we recommend that the WPI team include these criteria in a survey sent to company employees in the future.
​
Harassment Policy Suggestion 2: Address Retaliation. We suggest that the WPI Index also add retaliation as a new 1.5 criterion. Retaliation, as described by the EEOC, is “(punishment) for filing a charge or complaint of discrimination, participating in a discrimination investigation or lawsuit, or opposing discrimination” (U.S. EEOC, n.d.c). This can include behaviors like firing the employee, leaving a negative review, or not promoting an employee due to their complaint (Becton et al., 2017, p. 105). Without a policy that addresses retaliation, harassment policies may be less effective, as studies show that “70% of women who reported suffering harassment also responded that they never reported it due to fear of retaliation” (Becton et al., 2017, p. 105). Therefore, the EEOC recommends that company policies ensure that anyone who reports harassment will be guarded against retaliation and that their complaint will be kept as confidential as possible (U.S. EEOC, n.d.a).
​
How Retaliation Fits On The Index. On the current WPI Index, three out of 32 companies mention outlawing retaliation. With research showing that women may be hesitant to report abuse out of fear of retaliation, it is important that we reward companies for addressing this issue in version 1.5. Therefore, we recommend adding retaliation as a new criterion that is scored on the Index. Lastly, the key term, retaliation, will be easy to search for when scoring companies.
Harassment Policy Suggestion 3: Consequences. McDonald et al. (2015) also suggests that for a policy to be effective, it must include “a statement of intent to enforce seriously and promptly, and a clear specification of the penalties for violation” (p. 44). Studies have shown that “certainty of punishment for SH may provide more effective prevention than the severity of punishment” (McDonald et al., 2015, p. 44 ), therefore it is important that companies make it clear to employees that action will be taken so that employees do not hesitate to report an incident. The EEOC corroborates this recommendation, stating that policies should “assure immediate and appropriate corrective action” (U.S. EEOC, n.d.a) that does not burden the individual reporting the incident. Altogether, for an anti-harassment policy to be successful, it should ensure employees that their complaints will not be ignored. Without an actionable policy in place, harassment in the workplace may persist. For example, Walmart recently had to pay $410,000 dollars to settle a sexual harassment lawsuit because they did not take action on reports of harassment spanning from 2014-2018 (U.S. EEOC, 2021). The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) brought the suit against Walmart due to the company’s failure to address written complaints of sexual assault over several years (U.S. EEOC, 2021). In a New York Walmart store, a male employee was reported for unwanted sexual comments and touching without consent (U.S. EEOC, 2021). Rather than stepping in, Walmart “failed to stop his harassment and instead advised her to ‘stand up’ for herself and put her ‘big girl panties on’” (U.S. EEOC, 2021). While Walmart has now agreed to provide harassment training to prevent future incidences and monetary support for the victims, it is clear that not addressing sexual harassment reports can be detrimental.
​
How Consequences Fit On The Index. Companies on the current WPI Index do not provide information about specific consequences for those who break the rules regarding sexual harassment. However, if employees do not feel as though action will be taken, they may be less likely to report sexual harassment, as research shows. Therefore, companies that make statements assuring employees that action will be taken should be rewarded positively in version 1.5 of the Index. While this criterion may be difficult to score for, the abundance of very public lawsuits surrounding big companies that fail to address sexual harassment claims could be used as evidence for whether or not companies are following through with their promises to act.
Harassment Policy Suggestion 4: Policy Upkeep. While written anti-harassment policies are necessary, “unless these are part of more extensive efforts that also seek to increase awareness through information and training,” they may not be successful in preventing harassment (Salin, 2009). The EEOC recommends providing training for employees, managers, and supervisors regarding anti-harassment procedures (U.S. EEOC, n.d.a). McDonald et al. (2015) outlines the specifics of this training, saying that sessions should be “conducted regularly and universally, that is, at all sites and across all hierarchical levels and not only to targeted groups or those who attend voluntarily” (p. 45). Providing training ensures that policies are well-understood. Furthermore, Bell et al. (2002) argues that part of a company’s anti-harassment efforts should include conducting regular surveys to determine how women feel about their role within the organization and their experiences with workplace harassment (p. 163). These assessments can help a company identify areas of improvement and ensure its policies are working as intended.
​
How Policy Upkeep Fits On The Index. The WPI team currently provides scores for both harassment training and harassment policy as two separate criteria on the Index. However, since training may be necessary to make a harassment policy effective, the team may consider making scores for harassment policy contingent upon whether or not the company also has a policy for training. Moreover, companies that conduct assessments to determine the effectiveness of their harassment policies and are actively checking up on their employees should receive credit for doing so in the future, as this element is not measurable within our current scoring scheme.
​
Criteria 10: Gender Equality Program
Gender equality, also known as gender equity, is the concept of treating individuals of all genders fairly and equally without any discrimination or bias. It is a fundamental human right that upholds the principles of social justice and aims to eliminate gender-based disparities in various aspects of life, including but not limited to, employment, education, healthcare, and social and economic opportunities. Gender equality is not just about ensuring equal representation of men and women in all spheres of life, but also recognizing and valuing the diverse identities and experiences of individuals of different genders, including non-binary, transgender, and gender non-conforming individuals. Gender equality is crucial for corporations as it promotes a more inclusive and diverse work environment, fosters innovation, enhances corporate reputation, and contributes to sustainable development. In today's globalized and competitive business world, corporations are increasingly recognizing the importance of gender equality as a strategic imperative for organizational success. A diverse workforce, which includes individuals of different genders, ethnicities, races, ages, and sexual orientations, brings a variety of perspectives, experiences, and talents to the table. This diversity can lead to increased creativity, innovation, and problem-solving skills, as employees with different backgrounds and identities bring unique insights and approaches to work challenges. Research by McKinsey & Company, a global management consulting firm, found that companies with more diverse workforces, including gender diversity, tend to have better financial performance and are more likely to outperform their less diverse peers (M&C, 2015).
​
Gender Equality: Overview of Definition & Semantics. The index refers to gender equality as “the existence of programs to promote gender equality issues.” The definition is clear, but the criteria to meet the definition seems vague. Companies should have educational programs with set lesson plans on gender equity in place, and female employees should have a safe way of reporting gender disparities. Then, a set enforcement policy must be in place in order for the report to be effective. Organizations are often required to comply with local, state, and federal laws and regulations related to equal employment opportunity (EEO) and anti-discrimination.
​
Gender Equality Suggestion 1: Defining Educational Programs. Gender equality education programs refer to initiatives and activities that are designed to raise awareness, promote understanding, and foster a culture of gender equality within a company or organization. This differs from engagement or mentorship programs because the focus is on gender equity awareness. These programs can take various forms, such as workshops, training sessions, seminars, webinars, online courses, and other educational interventions that aim to educate employees and stakeholders about the principles and practices of gender equality, diversity, and inclusion. They help employees become aware of the existing gender biases, stereotypes, and inequalities that may exist within the workplace and society at large. By promoting awareness and understanding, these programs enable employees to recognize and challenge discriminatory practices and attitudes and cultivate a more inclusive and equitable work environment (Bentley University, 2023). This can lead to increased employee engagement, satisfaction, and productivity, as employees feel empowered to bring their authentic selves to work and contribute to their fullest potential. In addition, these programs can enhance their corporate reputation and brand image, positioning them as progressive and socially responsible organizations. It will attract and retain top talent who prioritize diversity and inclusion in their career choices and contribute to positive relationships with customers, investors, and other stakeholders.
​
How Educational Programs Fit On the Index. On the Women’s Power and Influence Index, 5 out of 30 companies have educational programs for gender equality issues including BlackRock, AIG, Disney, CVS, and PepsiCo. CVS provides a good example in their data- “our entire enterprise will participate in a learning experience designed to enhance awareness of biases and move toward conscious inclusion through heightened awareness and implementation of inclusive behaviors.” With research showing that corporations can benefit from teaching their employees about implicit bias, discrimination, etc. The index should use this requirement in version 1.5 to better businesses. Keywords that can be used to easily search the index include learning, training, events, and speaker.
​
Gender Equality Suggestion 2: Reporting Policy. A reporting and enforcement policy provides a clear mechanism for employees to report incidents of gender discrimination or harassment in the workplace. It encourages a culture of accountability, where all employees are empowered to report such incidents without fear of retaliation. This helps create a safe and inclusive work environment where employees feel respected, valued, and protected from discriminatory behavior. Having a reporting and enforcement policy is often a legal requirement, and failure to comply with these laws can result in legal liabilities, fines, and reputational damage for the corporation (EEOC). By providing clear guidelines on how to report incidents, outlining the steps for investigation and resolution, and defining consequences for policy violations, the policy sends a strong message that gender discrimination or harassment will not be tolerated and will be dealt with seriously and appropriately. It also provides avenues for employees to seek assistance and support and may include provisions for accommodation or remedial measures to address the impact. Having a robust policy demonstrates a commitment to creating a respectful and inclusive workplace and can help safeguard the corporation's reputation as a responsible corporate citizen.
​
How Reporting Policies Fit On the Index. The only company that has a reporting mechanism in its data is Citigroup. They state, “Our annual Voice of the Employee (VOE) survey is a useful tool to understand employee engagement and perceptions about our firm.” Anonymous surveys are a good start but become meaningless if we cannot analyze the results as public knowledge, and they do not occur often enough if only conducted annually. After a report is made, a set enforcement policy must ensure challengers don’t take advantage of the system. If a company lets one case slide, others will know it's not serious. None of the corporations have an enforcement policy mentioned in our public data collection. This may be due to legal reasons, but at least an acknowledgment of a policy would be beneficial for the index to require.
​
Gender Equity Suggestion 3: Equal Opportunity Employer. An equal opportunity employer is a company or organization that follows the principle of providing equal opportunities for employment, advancement, and benefits to all individuals, regardless of their race, color, religion, sex, national origin, age, disability, or other protected characteristics under applicable laws (EEOC). It means that all applicants and employees should be treated fairly and without discrimination during recruitment, hiring, promotions, compensation, and other employment-related decisions. In many countries, there are laws and regulations that mandate equal-opportunity employment practices, and employers are legally obligated to comply with them. For example, in the United States, federal laws such as Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), and the Age Discrimination in Employment Act (ADEA) prohibit discrimination in employment based on certain protected characteristics, and employers are required to provide equal employment opportunities to all individuals. However, the specific requirements and scope of equal opportunity employment laws may vary by country and state. Some jurisdictions may have more stringent requirements, while others may have different protected characteristics under their laws. It's important for employers to understand and comply with the applicable equal opportunity employment laws in their specific location to ensure compliance and promote a fair and inclusive workplace.
​
How Equal Opportunity Fits On the Index. 2 out of 30 companies, Conoco Phillips & Airbnb, state that they are an equal opportunity employer. Since it is a legal requirement in parts of the United States, it would be comprehensive to add this to the criteria for version 1.5. It seems to fulfill the basic requirements for gender equality, and it would be easy to search for the keyword “equal opportunity” in the data. Future versions of the index should ensure that all data is appropriately categorized. Many items in the gender equality data table belonged to recruitment efforts, professional development, or healthcare.
​
Criteria 11: Community Engagement
Community Engagement is the process of working collaboratively with and through groups of people affiliated by geographic proximity, special interest, or similar situations to address issues affecting the well-being of those people. It is a powerful vehicle for bringing about environmental and behavioral changes that will improve the health of the community and
its members. It often involves partnerships and coalitions that help mobilize resources and influence systems, change relationships among partners, and serve as catalysts for changing policies, programs, and practices (CDC, 1997, p. 9). From this definition, “working collaboratively” implies that the company needs a distinct set of morals and values for it to succeed. Especially with bigger corporations, all employees need to acknowledge a shared responsibility to work towards a goal. Community involvement is the key to success for any business because it builds relationships and increases awareness and visibility. Such as having community programs every so often will increase a sense of community (Forbes Councils Member, 2019).
It is found that community programs have the ability to empower employees, align engagement with business values, and maintain passion (Forbes Councils Member, 2019). Many companies focus on giving back to the community; for example, Autodesks allows employees to take up to 4 hours a month of paid time off to volunteer in their community. This type of encouragement aligns with their moral of “helping people imagine, design and create a better world.” (Shenfeld, 2017).
Community Engagement: Definition and Semantics. Currently, the criteria is scored based on whether companies have organizational support for initiatives that drive gender equality and women’s empowerment in the community. The scoring of corporate community programs is based on gender-related aspects, such as the availability of initiatives aimed at fostering a sense of community among female employees. The keywords and/or phrases that are assessed are “values and morals,” "mission, "global community,” and “community and company’s mission”. There are some gaps in the definitions that can be improved in future versions 1.5 and beyond, such as the nuance between the words morals, values, and missions. The index needs to consider how each company presents its morals, values, and missions and whether their morals, values, and missions are the same or whether they have a coherent mission statement with values and morals that align with it. For example, Paypal has specific community programs for their female employees or women in the community, such as Black Girl Ventures is a program that helps women grow their businesses through mentorship. Paypal also offers a Recharge program for women out of the workforce to ease the transition into the technology industry.
The index will also consider the impact of the “one and done” model, where companies would hold events just to check off the community engagement requirement that they state in their public policies. In the future, the index would need to be able to analyze trends in the community programs/events corporations hold.
​
What Constitutes Community Engagement: As mentioned above, some companies follow the “one and done” model for community engagement by hosting one-off events or fundraisers without a purpose or strategy (Barker, 2022). Although a physical event was held, it does not constitute community engagement. A company's culture can be positively impacted if its employees witness that its leadership is committed to contributing to social causes (Barker, 2022). Community engagement comes in different forms, such as relationship-building, community education, direct service projects, and more (GovOS, 2022). Successful community engagement events require a clear goal and outcome; hence, the U.S. Department of Labor Women’s Bureau conducted a Strategic Community Outreach Study and created a “Logic Model” as a guide to achieve that.
Community Engagement: On the Index. On the Women’s Power Index, only 12 of 30 companies have held or do hold community engagement events for women in the community or within the company. The companies are Biogen, Disney, PayPal, Google, Starbucks, Apple, Intel, Cisco, Pepsi Co, Salesforce, Coca-Cola, and Verizon. Many of these companies have “community,” “diversity,” and “Inclusion” in their mission statement or values of the company. For example, Intel formed “Intel’s Women’s Initiative” in 2000 to connect, inspire, develop, and advance women at Intel. Intel provides mentor programs and partners with several organizations, such as the Anita Borg Institute (ABI), where Intel became an annual partner as a Grace Hopper Conference Sponsor and the Women of Vision sponsor. More than 100 Intel women attend the Grace Hopper Conference for professional development. Intel also joined the Corporate Partnership Council in 2004, where they partnered with the Society of Women Engineers to provide scholarships to female students who wish to pursue engineering. Lastly, Intel also sponsored the International Leadership Conference, where they partnered with the Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers Women in Engineering (Intel).
​
Version 1.5 and Beyond
After conducting this research on criteria additions, we created a presentation to propose the new criteria for version 1.5 to the rest of the WPI team. Following this presentation, each week, we dedicate meeting time to discussing with the group which criteria should be officially added to our Index. The WPI data team is working to propose a new method of scoring that will account for the new criteria additions. Therefore, version 1.5 will reflect the additions we have proposed. This link contains the full presentation that we prepared for the Women’s Power and Influence Index.
Furthermore, we suggest that the additional criteria that we have determined are important but not scorable using public data be accounted for in future versions of the WPI Index beyond 1.5. We suggested that future WPI members design a survey to send to companies to gather deeper information. For example, for the criterion harassment and discrimination, a survey could be used to ask employees how often they participate in training and how effective they believe it is.
​
Future Areas of Inclusion
Although the 1.5 criteria were developed and meant to be a more refined index than the 1.0, there are still many gaps in the methodology, such as efficiently gathering all the public disclosures and gender policies that each corporate company has. All data collected and analyzed is based on what is currently available to the public, and all the data is collected manually by the Women’s Power and Influence Index team. The methodology is currently still efficient enough for us to make nuanced and valuable conclusions about the companies based on the 11 criterion mentioned above.
​
AI and Machine Learning
The Difference Engine hopes to advance the methodology to 2.0 and up in the future. In the past year, artificial intelligence (AI) technology has made significant advancements. For example, ChatGPT, developed by OpenAI, has become everyone’s personal virtual assistant. The researchers had implemented many trainings, such as adversarial training to prevent ChatGPT from being influenced into making adverse decisions and reinforcement learning from human feedback training to create more human-like responses (Aydın, 2023). Hence, with technology such as ChatGPT, data collection and analysis can be programmed into an algorithm where a score in the WPI can be generated from collecting data on the gender policies of companies. A downfall to this concept might be the creation of an algorithm in which the line would be drawn between the score of 1 or 1.5. Turning a concept/policy with complexity and nuances into a numerical binary score can be challenging to program. With that said, AI technology is designed to automatically learn and make predictions or decisions based on data patterns without any human instruction. The index has been established enough to the point where there have been companies that are already ranked. The AI doesn’t necessarily need to know the explicit line between two scores, but it will know how to decipher the scoring method similar to a human. Even Though there are disadvantages to using AI technology, it can be very beneficial and a 2021 efficient way to generate scores.
​
Intersectionality
Intersectionality is a term coined by Kimberle Crenshaw, which describes how inequality and privilege intersect with one another based on “gender, race, ethnicity, sexual orientation, gender identity, disability, class, and other forms of discrimination” (Center for Intersectional Justice). Crenshaw argues that individuals' intersections form a unique identity that must be “analyzed and addressed simultaneously to prevent one form of inequality from reinforcing another. In the case of the WPI, we currently generalize women but do not account for different kinds of women (i.e., disabled women, black women, trans women) who all experience different dimensions of discrimination. ​
The Women’s Power and Influence Index: Early Reactions to an Equity Ranking Methodology
In 2021 Arizona State University launched The Difference Engine: An ASU Center for the Future of Equality, a university-wide center staffed by faculty, alumni, and students working to address pressing economic, political, and social inequalities. The Difference Engine aims to tackle injustices using an interdisciplinary approach. Many different schools within ASU have come together to establish the center, including The College of Liberal Arts and Sciences, the Ira A. Fulton Schools of Engineering, the W. P. Carey School of Business, and the Sandra Day O’Connor College of Law. The Difference Engine is “a community of doers, thinkers, and storytellers that creates innovative products to help people defeat injustice” (ASU News, 2021). This community of Difference Engineers has developed various projects to tackle real issues and create real change.
The Women’s Power and Influence (WPI) Index is a product created by The Difference Engine to address gender inequality in the workplace. The WPI Index is a ranking system that utilizes public information on Fortune 500 companies' policies to assign the company a score for gender equity. The companies are scored on a set of criteria that women have identified as being most important to achieving gender equity in the workplace. Similar to the way Yelp provides reviews for businesses that sway public opinion, the WPI Index makes information about company policies accessible and easy to understand. By bringing this information to light, not only will women be able to make more informed decisions about where to seek employment, but businesses will also be incentivized to create policies that better reflect the needs of women.
With the combined efforts of Arizona State University faculty, Barrett, The Honors College students, and WPI team members, the first version of the Index was born in 2021. A ranking system was built, criteria were chosen, data was collected, and 50 Fortune 500 companies were scored. Fast forward to 2023, the Index is gradually being released to the public company by company, and we are now looking to expand our ranking system. As the 2022-2023 Barrett, The Honors College thesis team selected to participate in this project, we aim to build on the incredible work completed by last year's team by providing further research and suggestions to help the Index continue to grow. Our thesis project will focus on three main goals: shedding light on how social pressures create positive change to bolster the Index’s purpose, suggesting new criteria for version 1.5, and raising awareness for the WPI Index to increase its scope and power.
​
Part I: How Social Movements Can Inform the WPI Index
A vital premise of the WPI index is that “public rankings ignite behavior change” (The Difference Engine, n.d.). The rationale is that by ranking companies on their gender equality policies and making this information accessible to the public, they will be incentivized to improve their gender equality policies. The social pressure to maintain a positive public image will compel companies to address any gender disparities. There are numerous examples in recent years of social movements that have drastically altered the way companies operate. Through the #MeToo and Black Lives Matter movements, we have seen how much influence public opinion and social media can have on whether a company succeeds. In 2023, people no longer stand for inequality, and the momentum created by these movements can help make the goals of the WPI Index a reality. We can learn how the Index can inspire change by examining social movements that have successfully challenged and changed company policy. This section will first provide background information about each social movement, then explain the positive changes that resulted, and finally detail how the Index connects to the social movement.
​​
An Overview of The MeToo Movement
The MeToo Movement was founded in 2006 by activist Tarana Burke (“Get to know us,” 2020). While working as a youth leader for children of color, Tarana Burke encountered many stories of sexual abuse that resonated with her, being a survivor herself. This led her to create the MeToo Movement, which focused on bringing resources and support to those who have experienced sexual harassment and abuse, primarily women and girls of color. The movement stresses “empowerment through empathy” (“Get to know us,” 2020, para. 5) by connecting survivors to share their stories. Schmidt (2017) describes how the social media hashtag, #MeToo, gained traction on Twitter in 2017 after sexual harassment and abuse allegations surfaced against film producer Harvey Weinstein. Actress Alyssa Milano posted a tweet that asked women who have been sexually assaulted or harassed to respond with the words me too (Schmidt, 2017). The tweet went viral, with thousands of replies and posts on other platforms speaking out against sexual violence (Ohlheiser, 2017).
​
Positive Results of #MeToo: Workplace Change
In 2016, before the #MeToo Movement, The Harvard Business Review surveyed 250 women in the U.S. about sexual harassment in the workplace (Johnson et al., 2019). A subsequent survey was completed in 2018 to determine if sexual harassment outcomes in the workplace had improved for women following the #MeToo Movement. The results of the studies indicate that the social pressure brought on by this movement did lead to real change. For example, “In 2016, 25% of women reported being sexually coerced, and in 2018 that number had declined to 16%” (Johnson et al., 2019, para. 4). Further, “unwanted sexual attention declined from 66% of women to 25%” (Johnson et al., 2019, para. 4). These findings show that women experienced less sexual harassment in the workplace after the #MeToo Movement. Moreover, women in the study reported increased self-esteem and decreased self-doubt. This is evidence that applying social pressure can help create societal change.
​
Positive Results of #MeToo: Organizational Change
The Guardian reported in 2022 that Mcdonald’s Corporation employees began speaking out against the company’s poor handling of abuse allegations (Sainato, 2022). As stories of abuse and retaliation began surfacing, Mcdonald’s faced several class-action lawsuits (Sainato, 2022). Mcdonald’s responded by pledging their commitment to a work environment free of sexual harassment, implementing Global Brand Standards aimed at improving the safety and well-being of their employees (Sainato, 2022). Furthermore, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), the federal agency that receives and investigates workplace discrimination claims, reported that their harassment prevention training was booked for months after #MeToo (Taylor, 2019). In 2019, the chair of the EEOC, Victoria Lipnic, told CNBC that “from the beginning of the #MeToo movement to now, I have seen corporate employers and non-profit organizations taking this issue so much more seriously” (Taylor, 2019, para. 6). This demonstrates how companies have responded to increased public scrutiny and took action to improve.
​
How #MeToo Inspires The WPI Index
The Women’s Power and Influence Index draws inspiration from the #MeToo campaign. As celebrities and other well-known people began to speak up about their experiences, more and more women were encouraged to tell their stories. Businesses and employers were called out for sweeping sexual violence under the rug; the public made it clear that they would no longer tolerate sexual harassment in the workplace. Companies desperate to salvage their reputations damaged during the #MeToo Movement rushed to make statements and create policy changes to support their employees better.
The #MeToo Movement serves as a model for what the Index hopes to achieve. Similar to celebrities' role during #MeToo, the Index is working to develop partnerships with notable companies. By establishing relationships with well-known companies and having open conversations about how they can improve, other organizations may feel compelled to make similar efforts toward gender equality. Furthermore, by providing public rankings that expose the strengths and weaknesses of gender equity policies, companies will feel pressured to make changes, as they did during #MeToo. The movement paved the way for the WPI Index, as #MeToo sparked conversations about how women are treated in the workplace. Through #MeToo, we have seen how powerful social media can influence social change. Similarly, the WPI team aims to leverage social media to increase awareness about our Index, helping women make informed decisions when seeking employment. The #MeToo Movement is a roadmap for the WPI Index, proving that public opinion can facilitate meaningful change.
​
The Black Lives Matter Movement
The Black Lives Matter (BLM) Movement emerged in 2013 as a response to the acquittal of George Zimmerman, who shot and killed 17-year-old Trayvon Martin in Sanford, Florida (NPR, 2018). Since then, the movement has gained traction and visibility, particularly following high-profile police killings of Black individuals. BLM is a social movement that addresses systemic racism and police brutality in the United States. According to a report by the Center for Policing Equity, Black people are three times more likely to be killed by police than white people in the United States (CPE, 2016). This statistic is particularly alarming given that Black people comprise only 13% of the US population.
​
Strategies used by the Black Lives Matter Movement
One of the primary strategies employed by Black Lives Matter is protest. According to the New York Times, the protests organized by the BLM movement are among the largest in U.S. history, with millions participating (New York Times, 2020). The protests were overwhelmingly peaceful, leading to a drastic decrease in police homicides and reduced racial disparities in policing (NBER, 2020).
Another strategy used by the BLM movement is social media activism. They used social media platforms like Twitter, Tiktok, and Instagram to raise awareness of racial justice issues. The hashtag, #BlackLivesMatter, has been used millions of times on social media platforms and has become a rallying cry for those who support BLM. According to Deen Freelon, the BLM movement has successfully used social media to mobilize supporters and influence public opinion (Deen Freelon, 2016). A study by the Pew Research Center found that people in 17 countries followed the BLM protests closely in 2020, with 85% of respondents in the United Kingdom saying they were aware of the demonstrations (Pew Research Center, 2020). This shows the movement's global impact and ability to address racial injustice internationally.
​
Positive Results of #BlackLivesMatter: Public Opinion
The Black Lives Matter movement has been one of the most powerful social movements. BLM's impact on public opinion has been particularly pronounced among younger generations. The Pew Research Center found that most Americans now believe the country must continue striving toward racial equity (PRC, 2020). Additionally, most Americans believe that police officers who cause harm to citizens should be held accountable for their actions.
​
Results of #BlackLivesMatter: Organizational Change
Black Lives Matter sparked a nationwide conversation about racial injustice and has caused companies to re-examine themselves. According to Forbes, the movement has pressured corporations to demonstrate their commitment to diversity, equity, and inclusion, leading to innovations in hiring practices and corporate social responsibility programs (Forbes, 2020). Several companies, including Ben & Jerry's, Netflix, Nike, Twitter, and Bank of America, have donated significantly to racial justice organizations and have committed to addressing systemic racism in their operations. 94% of CEOs have increased their investment in DEI initiatives, including training programs, mentorship opportunities, and employee resource groups that focus on issues related to race and social justice (Deloitte, 2021). According to a report by McKinsey & Company, companies that prioritize diversity are more likely to perform better financially (M&K, 2020).
​
Positive Results of #BlackLivesMatter: Policy Change
Black Lives Matter has contributed to a shift in attitudes toward the criminal justice system. According to a report by the National Conference of State Legislatures, over 3,000 police reform bills were introduced in state legislatures in 2020 (NCSL, 2021). These bills address various issues, including using force, banning chokeholds, police training, requiring body cameras, banning no-knock warrants, creating a national police misconduct registry, and limiting qualified immunity (PBS, 2022). According to a report by the National Police Accountability Project, the movement has established civilian oversight boards and independent investigations of police misconduct in several cities, including New York, Chicago, and Los Angeles (NPAP, 2020). The oversight boards are tasked with investigating complaints of police misconduct and recommending disciplinary action against officers found to have violated policies or engaged in abusive behavior. The movement has also prompted transformations in the criminal justice system, focusing on reducing mass incarceration. According to a report by the Brennan Center for Justice, BLM has led to adjustments in sentencing laws, the reduction of mandatory minimum sentences, and the implementation of diversion programs for low-level offenses (BCJ, 2020). These alterations are aimed at addressing racial disparities in the system.
​
How #BlackLivesMatter Can Inspire The WPI Index
In future versions of the Women’s Power & Influence Index, the team hopes to add criteria on the racial equity of women. Equality includes justice for all women, not just white women. According to the Institute for Research on Labor and Employment, women earn eighty-two cents compared to every dollar men make (IRLE, 2018). However, this can be further broken down if we examine the intersectionality of women and race. Compared to the one-dollar men get paid, white women earn seventy-nine cents, Asian women earn eighty-seven cents, Black women earn sixty-three cents, Indigenous women earn sixty cents, and Latina women earn fifty-five cents. Although they are doing the same jobs and completing the same schooling, society is still undervaluing women’s work based on race.
The index can also learn from the successful Black Lives Matter movement marketing. The key is to remain consistent and relevant on all forms of social media like TikTok, Twitter, Facebook, and Instagram to continue increasing awareness of gender equality issues amongst corporations. As more people shared stories of injustice, live-streamed protests, and videoed evidence of police brutality, many became educated on the issues and rallied behind the BLM movement. The public started questioning corporations and governments on why we still live in a systemically racist society and demanded change. Companies felt pressured to deliver statements containing promises of dedication to diversity and inclusion policies or practices. Individuals felt more empowered to call out racial injustice when they saw it due to the Black Lives Matter movement. This showcased how powerful social media can be in times of social injustice. The Women’s Power and Influence Index hopes to have the same effect by publicly displaying ratings of companies' gender equity practices. If a company receives a low rating, it
can become motivated to improve itself so that its reputation is not hindered. Friendly competition can form between companies to try to become the highest rated on gender inclusivity. The index can also mentor companies in improving their ratings if they are unsure how to proceed.
​
Part II: Criteria Research and Suggestions for Version 1.5
The second portion of our thesis project focuses on researching and suggesting new criteria for the next version of the Women’s Power and Influence Index. The current binary criteria used to score companies on the WPI Index are pay gap, professional development, mentorship, recruitment efforts, child care benefits, caregiver paid time off, health benefits, community engagement, gender equality programs, harassment policy, and harassment and discrimination training. Using each company’s public data, last year's team determined whether or not the company addressed each of these 11 concerns. For each criterion, if the company had a policy, they received a score of one. If the company did not have a policy in that area or could not be located, it received a score of zero. Finally, these companies were ranked based on their scores as either trailblazers, pacesetters, or late bloomers.
Version one of the WPI Index does not yet measure qualitative data, or the nature of a policy, only whether a policy exists. However, in the next version of the Index, we also want to expand our criteria and scoring methodology to capture quality. Furthermore, while completing our criteria projects, we discovered that some companies had more detailed and inclusive policies than others, yet the current scoring model awards both companies a score of 1. By adding new criteria to the Index, companies that have more comprehensive policies will be rewarded. Through our research and the help of the WPI team, we are working to create new methods of scoring based on our proposed criteria additions. These changes will be incorporated into the next release of the Index, called version 1.5.
​
Criteria Definitions Project
The first project our team undertook was to dissect the current definitions for each criterion and identify any missing elements to ensure our Index captured all angles of that criterion. After brainstorming about what should be added to each definition, we shared our initial thoughts with our peers on the Women’s Power and Index team. Next, we decided on the specific areas of research we wanted to explore to help determine which additional elements should be added to version 1.5. For example, the current definition of the criterion mentorship is the existence of a formal mentoring program to facilitate the advancement of the careers of female employees. Together with our team, we decided it may be beneficial to research formal versus informal mentoring to see which practice is best for women. By incorporating best practices as additional criteria on the Index, only companies that meet these researched standards will receive the highest scores. Companies will no longer just need to have a policy in existence to succeed. Adding new criteria increases the scope of our Index and raises the bar for companies we score.
​
Criteria Semantics Project
After addressing the definitions for the criteria, the next step was to examine the data collected from each company on the WPI Index. We entitled this portion of the project criteria semantics because we took a closer look at the specific wording of each policy statement collected to identify meaningful trends and key elements. We created an Excel sheet that detailed each company and statement for all 11 criteria and highlighted all significant terms that should be researched further. For example, many companies use the term annual review in their policy statement for the criterion pay gap. Therefore, we examined annual reviews to determine whether or not they should be added as a new criterion for version 1.5 of the WPI Index. In addition, as more companies are scored on the Index, the key phrases we identified during the semantics project can be used as signifiers that a company should or should not receive a one, making scoring more routine and reliable.
After parsing out the criteria definitions and semantics, we researched the areas of interest we identified during these projects. The next section of our paper will address each criterion individually, including the research we have conducted and changes we are proposing for the next version of the Index, 1.5.
​
Criteria 1: Pay Gap
Trotter et al. (2017) defines the gender wage gap as “the difference between male and female earnings, with female earnings expressed as a percentage of male earnings” (p. 529). According to Payscale’s 2022 State of the Gender Pay Gap Report, when men's and women’s median salaries were compared in the uncontrolled pay gap, women earned only 82 cents for every dollar men made in 2022 (Payscale, 2022). Moreover, the controlled pay gap, which accounts for women and men with the same “job title, education, experience, industry, job level, and hours worked” (Payscale, 2022), still resulted in women making 99 cents for every dollar men earned. Altogether, it is clear that there is a gender disparity when it comes to pay, and this disparity only widens when looking at additional factors like race, age, parenthood, education, and location. For example, the U.S. Government Accountability Office found that in 2021, “Hispanic or Latina women earned about $.58 and Black women earned about $.63 for every dollar White men earned” (U.S. Government Accountability Office Office, 2022). Furthermore, women earn less as they age, the pay gap widens with children, and those working in metro cities make less than men overall (Payscale, 2022). Research shows that women are also paid less comparatively when they are more educated and move to higher positions (Payscale, 2022). What is the cause of this gap? In a Pew Research Study, half of the participants identified discriminatory treatment of women by employers as the prominent reason for the gender pay gap (Aragão, 2023). The study also revealed that even though women are more educated than ever, the pay gap is not closing as quickly as it should be. For example, women only make 82% as much as men in 2022, compared to 80% in 2002 (Kochhar, 2023). Overall, it is clear that the gender pay gap is a real issue, and not enough is being done to solve it; therefore, it is vital that companies are doing their part.
​
Pay Gap: Overview of Definition & Semantics. The current definition on WPI Index for pay gap is the existence of a policy to address the gender pay gap. While the existence of a policy is a great start, this definition still needs to account for the quality of the policy. For example, using our current criteria and scoring methodology, the company NVIDIA whose pay policy states, “We are committed to providing fair pay and equitable opportunities for advancement to all employees” (NVIDIA, 2021, p. 38), received a score of one on the Index. However, the company Airbnb’s policy reads, “prioritizing equal pay for equal work for all: we have conducted a pay equity analysis annually since 2015 to examine and adjust pay gaps” (Airbnb, 2022) and also received a score of one. Despite Airbnb taking action to measure and eliminate the pay gap, NVIDIA and Airbnb score the same. Our goal is to remedy the differences between the two statements by expanding the criterion pay gap to reward higher marks to companies that go beyond just having a policy in existence. When looking at the semantics of the policy statements on our Index for the criterion pay gap, we identified pay transparency, annual review or pay equity analysis, and the Equal Pay Pledge as possible criteria additions to be researched further.
​
Pay Gap Suggestion 1: Pay Transparency. Pay transparency can be defined as “the extent to which employees are familiar with each other’s pay levels” created by “the employer’s compensation philosophy and resulting pay practices” (Trotter et al., 2017, p. 531). Moreover, pay secrecy can be described as “a restriction of the amount of information employees are provided about what others are paid” (p. 531). Research shows that pay secrecy can contribute to the gender pay gap, as employers can conceal the wage difference between men and women (p. 533). Pay transparency has been suggested as a possible mechanism to reduce the pay gap. For example, firms with 250 employees or more in the United Kingdom must disclose pay on their company and government website (Duchini, 2020, p. 2). Duchini (2020) found that these pay transparency requirements resulted in an 18% decrease in the gender pay gap (p. 2). The study also revealed that the pressure of being compared to other firms and maintaining a positive reputation pushed companies to close their gender pay gap (p. 21-22). For example, “the public availability of firms’ gender equality indicators spurs comparisons across employers, prompting the worst performing firms to reduce their gender pay gap the most” (p. 23). With salary information made public, employers are also 9% more likely to include salary information in job vacancy postings, which seemingly improves entry-level gender equity (Duchini, 2020, p. 4). Pay transparency can be a powerful tool to close the gender pay gap.
Other studies also support the necessity for pay transparency, as it increases women’s knowledge about when they are being discriminated against and prevents companies from sweeping inequality under the rug. Kim (2015) conducted a study that found that “wages are higher for women in states that have outlawed pay secrecy, especially among those with college degrees” (p. 656). Furthermore, women working in states outlawing pay secrecy experience 3% higher wages, increasing up to 15% for college-educated women, depending on their level of education and the population (p. 664). When women are better informed about whether or not they are being underpaid, they can request that any disparities be adjusted (Kim, 2015, p. 657). In other words, discrimination can easily persist if women don’t know there is inequality.
Certain state laws have also been set in place to require pay transparency, making this criterion important for the WPI Index to include. CNBC reports that many states have enacted “salary transparency laws intended to give workers more leverage to negotiate their earnings and close wage gaps” (Liu, 2023). Beginning with the state of Colorado in 2021, a law that requires companies to include salary ranges on job advertisements was put in place. Since then, many states have followed suit, including California, which requires companies with at least 15 workers to provide salary ranges on job advertisements and salary information to current employees (Liu, 2023). Other states like New York, Nevada, and Washington have also proposed similar laws, making it so “roughly 1 in 4 U.S. workers now live in a place where employers are required to share pay ranges by law” (Liu, 2023). These laws have already resulted in positive changes, as a study on the top 15 companies in which workers are happiest with their pay found that “the majority of the best companies for good compensation are headquartered in California and New York City, where newly passed salary transparency laws will soon take effect” (Liu, 2022). With the recent push towards pay transparency, more states and companies will likely incorporate this practice, and gender pay equity may become more attainable.
Many companies have already committed to pay transparency and have found success. For example, Whole Foods is committed to complete pay transparency and has a policy that “every employee can see what every other employee earns by name” (Trotter et al., 2017, p. 535). The CEO talks about the many advantages of pay transparency, including creating a sense of unity and justice among team members and dispelling any perception of unequal compensation within the company (p. 535).
​
How Pay Transparency Fits On The Index. On the WPI Index, only two of the 30 companies we collected pay gap policy information from in 2021 cited pay transparency directly in their policy statement, Union Pacific and Netflix. However, given that the research emphasizes the many benefits of pay transparency and its role in achieving pay equity, it may be an essential new criterion to include in our rankings for version 1.5. Furthermore, with pay transparency slowly becoming required by state law, companies must be held to this standard. By rewarding companies for making pay transparency a part of their pay policy, other companies will feel pressure to measure up to their competitors. In addition, as the Index grows, we can search for the term pay transparency within company policies, making it easy to identify which companies are meeting this requirement and helping to standardize scoring.
​
Pay Gap Suggestion 2: Annual Review. Research supports the notion that gender pay equity can be achieved in part by companies conducting an annual pay review. According to the Harvard Business Review, “the best way for company leaders and boards to ensure their organization is paying employees fairly is to start with a pay equity audit (PEA)” (Barnard-Bahn, 2020). A PEA compares the salaries of employees doing similar work to identify any discrepancies in their pay. Conducting a pay equity audit exposes “incorrect job classifications or decentralized hiring authority that enables vast differences in starting salaries for the same jobs” (Barnard-Bahn, 2020). These analyses often show that pay equity policies are not being followed and that many employees are eligible for a raise. Analyses are necessary for “ethics, competitiveness, shareholder expectations, and legal compliance” (Barnard-Bahn, 2020). Recent studies show that “nearly three in five employees won’t apply to work at companies with an equity pay gap (make that 72% for women)” (Barnard-Bahn, 2020); therefore, it is beneficial for both employees and companies to conduct these analyses and eliminate any disparities.
Despite the many benefits of conducting an annual review of pay, a study shows that in 2022, only 23% of the 954 companies surveyed disclosed that they conducted a gender pay gap analysis (Ira & Radeva, 2022). Of the companies that do report on their analyses, most have achieved or are near achieving gender pay parity. However, it may be the case that companies only go public with their gender pay analysis results when they are positive, as only 35% of the companies who conduct analyses report these ratios (Ira & Radeva, 2022). In addition, companies are often reluctant to run these pay equity analyses because they are afraid they will discover a disparity and have to remedy it (Barnard-Bahn, 2020). However, “companies that disclose that they’ve conducted a pay equity analysis report, on average, nearly an eight percentage point higher mean five-year Return-on-Equity compared to their counterparts” (Vaghul et al., 2020), demonstrating how sharing PEA information can benefit employers as well. However, it is important to note that conducting one analysis is insufficient; companies must conduct pay reviews annually to be effective (Fox, 2022).
The makeup brand, L’Oréal, has successfully used a pay equity review to achieve gender parity (Jedeikin, 2021). After realizing two decades ago that men mainly staffed the company, the executives wanted to change (Jedeikin, 2021). Using the French National Demographic Research Institute, L’Oréal analyzed the gender pay gap and shared the results publicly. Despite only 9% of US companies going public with pay gap information, L’Oréal was determined to be part of the minority. They continue to conduct annual audits of hiring policies and staff. After incorporating this practice, “46% of the executives at L’Oréal USA are women and pay equity averages within 5%” (Jedeikin, 2021), showing that conducting an equal pay analysis can help businesses close their gender pay gap.
​
How Annual Review Fits On The Index. Nearly half of the companies on our WPI Index, 13 of the 30 we collected data for, mentioned conducting an equal pay analysis or annual review of their pay policy. As the previously discussed research presents, a yearly review is vital to achieving pay equity because, without one, companies will not be aware of where inequalities lie. Therefore, an annual review should be included in our ranking system for version 1.5. The key terms pay equity analysis, annual review, equal pay assessment, and review of median pay equity found in the company statements on the current Index can all be used as signifiers that the company should receive points for this criterion, contributing to our goal of standardizing scoring. Finally, in future versions, the WPI Index should create a survey to be sent out to companies to assess the specifics of their pay equity analyses, to discover if they are disclosing their results, and if the analysis is conducted annually.
Pay Gap Suggestion 3: Equal Pay Pledge. Former President Barack Obama aimed to involve U.S. private sector companies in advancing pay equity by creating a pledge they can sign on to in agreement to take certain steps towards closing the pay gap (National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.). Upon further research, we have discovered that 19 of the companies on the current WPI Index have signed this pledge, making it a valuable source of public information about which companies are committed to achieving pay equity. The pledge is an agreement to conduct an annual company-wide gender pay analysis and employ other initiatives to achieve equal pay (National Archives and Records Administration, n.d.). Given the pledge’s commitment to an annual review, by signing this pledge, the company signals support for gender equality and should receive positive marks on the Index.
​
How Equal Pay Pledge Fits On The Index. Three of the 30 companies mentioned on the current WPI Index reported signing the White House Equal Pay Pledge in their pay policy. By signing the pledge, the company agrees to conduct an annual review and make efforts toward achieving equitable pay. Since there is a public record of who signed the pledge, this may be a valuable resource for the WPI Team during data collection. The WPI Index stresses the importance of companies having information about their policies publicly available, so signing this pledge is an example of a company's efforts to do just that. Furthermore, the term Equal Pay Pledge can be searched for within company policies and used as a key term that signifies a company’s commitment to achieving pay equity.
​
Criteria 2: Professional Development
Professional development refers to improving and enhancing professionals' skills, knowledge, and competencies in their respective fields. It involves a continuous effort to learn, grow, and adapt to the changing needs and demands of the work environment. Professional development contributes to employees' personal and organizational success. It is not limited to a particular stage of one's career but is a continuous process that spans throughout one's working life. The traditional approach to professional development is often fragmented, while it is now a more comprehensive and continuous model to keep up with the changing demands of the workforce, advances in technology, and evolving societal needs.
Professional Development: Overview of Definition & Semantics. The Women’s Power and Influence Index’s definition of professional development is the “existence of professional development programs.” The mere existence of a program does not necessarily make it a good program, so this definition is too vague. For example, Ebay’s data states, “Women at eBay is a community led by women and men to advance gender diversity and inclusion at eBay." They do not mention what the program contains, but it received the top score of one. In contrast, a company that received the same score states, “Since 2016, Kraft Heinz has enabled groups and individuals to form and lead Business Resource Groups (BRGs) to help foster diversity, inclusion, and belonging for all employees. BRGs also offer learning and development opportunities, assist in talent recruitment and create a support network for employees.” This data shows a more comprehensive program with direct goals; however, this does not explicitly target women. If we are using this criterion to determine how gender equitable a company is, then we should have some kind of separate credit for gender-specific vs. general professional development programs. Accenture states, “The company has a women’s network open only to women,” but does not include any information on what it is about or what they do. To be sufficient, we need to further define what a professional development program constitutes.
​
Professional Development Suggestion 1: Define the program. A comprehensive and effective professional development program should include various elements to be considered sufficient. A thorough needs assessment is essential to identify the specific skills, knowledge, and competencies individuals need to develop to achieve their career goals. This can be done through surveys, assessments, interviews, or performance reviews to identify the current strengths and areas for improvement (Guskey, 2017). The program should have clear objectives aligned with the participants' needs and organizational goals. These objectives should be specific, measurable, achievable, relevant, and time-bound (SMART criteria) to ensure that they are clear (Forbes, 2022). It should also include relevant and up-to-date content aligned with the participants' needs and industry trends. This can be delivered through various methods, such as workshops, seminars, online courses, mentoring, coaching, or job rotations, to cater to different learning styles and preferences. This ensures the participants receive the necessary knowledge, skills, and resources to enhance their professional growth. Professional development should encourage interaction, collaboration, and reflection among the participants to promote active engagement and learning (Darling-Hammond et al., 2017). This can be achieved through group activities, discussions, case studies, and practical applications to facilitate the application of the learned concepts in real-world situations. Ongoing support and follow-ups are critical to ensure that the participants continue to develop and grow professionally over time (CDC). This can include follow-up workshops, mentoring, coaching, or regular check-ins to address challenges, provide feedback, and reinforce learning. Finally, a robust evaluation and feedback mechanism should be in place to assess the effectiveness of the professional development program.
​
How Defined Programs Fit On the Index. Currently, 21 out of 30 corporations on the index define what their professional development program for women entails. The research shows that having a defined purpose and action plan for a professional development program is very important, and the data shows that this is an achievable goal. The key terms development, mentoring, networking, and leadership skills found in the company statements on the current Index can all be used as signifiers that the company should receive points for this criterion, contributing to our goal of standardizing scoring.
​
Professional Development Suggestion 2: Separate credit for women-specific vs. general programs. Professional development is significant for women for several reasons, including historical and societal factors that have resulted in gender disparities in the workplace. Despite being more educated than men and constituting nearly half of the workforce, women are promoted far less often than men. We know this because women make up less than 9 percent of CEOs, according to Catalyst researchers. For young women to feel inspired to pursue their dream careers, we need more female role models to look up to, but that can’t happen if the higher-ups are holding them back. Refer to the chart below from catalyst.org titled “Pyramid: Women in S&P 500 Companies” (Catalyst, 2023). Professional development programs can provide women with the skills, knowledge, and resources needed to overcome these challenges and excel in their careers. For example, a study by Catalyst found that women who participated in leadership development programs reported increased confidence, improved negotiation skills, and enhanced networking opportunities, contributing to their career advancement (Catalyst, 2018). They offer possibilities for building meaningful connections with peers, mentors, and role models. Women often face challenges related to imposter syndrome and lack of confidence in the workplace. Professional development programs can help women build self-efficacy by providing opportunities to develop new skills, gain knowledge, and receive recognition for their achievements. Goal-setting and career planning can help women envision their career trajectories, identify opportunities for advancement, and develop strategies to achieve their career aspirations.
​
How Separate Credit Fits On the Index. Most companies on the index (28 out of 30) mention a women or gender-specific professional development program. This shows that it is a very viable criterion to add to version 1.5 of the index. The key terms gender diversity, inclusion, and advancement of women found in the company statements on the current Index can all be used as signifiers that the company should receive points for this criterion, contributing to our goal of standardizing scoring. For version 1.5, the index has decided to add a more precise vocabulary of “programs geared towards women” to the definition of professional development.
​
Criteria 3: Mentorship
A mentor is an individual “with advanced experience and knowledge committed to providing upward mobility and career support to their protégés” (Ragins et al., 2000, p. 1178). Mentors help employees interpret their environment and adjust to company culture (Hansman, 2002, p. 39). Mentorship has been shown to offer many benefits in the workplace, like career advancement, psychological support, and the incorporation of new employees (Hansman, p. 39). Studies have shown that employees with mentors are five times more likely to be promoted, and 87% feel more confident and empowered (Philip-Lye & Carruthers, 2022). Given the many benefits that mentors can provide, companies must incorporate mentorship into their policies.The question becomes whether all forms of mentorship are successful and if mentorship is more successful for certain groups.
According to Turner-Moffatt (2019), although women make up nearly half of the U.S. workforce and higher education students, they only comprise 32% of leadership positions (p. 17). Researchers identify mentorship as a key component in moving up in the workforce, so it is vital that women have access to mentorship programs (Turner-Moffatt, 2019, p. 17). However, mentoring is less available and less effective for women than men (Hansman, 2022, p. 40). Since mentors tend to be part of more dominant groups in society and are likely to choose mentees similar to themselves, minority groups in terms of race, gender, class, ability, ethnicity, or sexual orientation get pushed aside (Hansman, 2022, p. 39). Therefore, simply having a mentorship program does not equate to success for all groups. So, companies must pay attention to what types of mentoring relationships are most beneficial to prevent contributing to inequality.
​
Mentorship: Overview of Definition & Semantics. The current definition of the criterion mentorship, according to the Women’s Power and Influence Index, is the existence of formal mentoring programs to facilitate the advancement of careers of female employees. In version 1.5 of the Index, we want to add additional criteria under mentorship that measure the effectiveness of a company’s program. We hope that by rewarding companies for including certain beneficial elements in their mentorship programs, more companies will be incentivized to enhance their current programs, create a program, or simply be more transparent about what they do to attract female employees.
As we looked through the data collected by the WPI team, we found that twelve of the companies we scored on the Index stated that they have a specific mentorship program, while others were more vague about their policy. For example, Google has a specific female mentorship program called Women@ that they described in their mentorship policy, while ConocoPhillips simply stated, “Through the effective use of mentors, employees can receive career guidance as well as the opportunity to increase individual knowledge and skills needed to succeed” (Google, 2023, p. 6; ConocoPhillips, n.d.a). The differences between these two company policies are important to consider because while a company may say they provide mentorship if there is no program or structure involved, we can not be sure if this is true. Out of the 34 companies we accessed data for, 18 had no mention of mentoring for their employees, and only seven companies called out mentoring programs for women specifically. By researching which types of mentorship programs are most effective, we can suggest criteria additions that measure program quality.
Mentorship Suggestion 1: Female-Specific Mentoring. In 2023, only 53 Fortune 500 companies had women occupying their CEO position (Hinchliffe, 2023). However, a study on 215 Fortune 500 conducted by Pepperdine University “revealed that firms with the best record of promoting women to high positions were between 18% and 69% more profitable than the median Fortune 500 firms in their industries” (Dworkin, 2012, p. 364). Therefore, placing women in leadership positions is beneficial, yet they are still disadvantaged. Researchers argue that “the lack of coaching and grooming for women who seek these positions is a major factor in that underrepresentation” (Dworkin, 2012, p. 366). In fact, in a survey of college-educated employees at large companies, a lack of career development was the main reason participants cited why women have not reached higher positions (Dworkin, 2012, p. 366). Altogether, if companies want to be successful, it is beneficial to create mentoring opportunities for women that will increase their leadership potential. There is an abundance of scholarship on the benefits of mentoring for women in particular. For example, mentorship can provide benefits such as guarding women from discrimination, placing them in networks advantageous to their employment, and increasing their overall power within the organization (Dworkin, 2012, p. 367). According to Turner-Moffatt (2019), women experience distinctive challenges like a lack of self-confidence and poor self-advocacy (p. 17-18). Mentorship solves these problems by boosting their self-confidence, making them more likely to apply for promotions, ask questions, and bounce back after making a mistake (Turner-Moffatt, 2019, p. 17-18). Altogether, the benefits of mentorship have been shown to increase both salaries and promotions for women, potentially helping to close the gap between men and women in the workplace. More specifically, a study found that retention and promotion rates for women participating in mentoring programs increased from 15% to 38% (Philip-Lye & Carruthers, 2022), showing how valuable mentoring can be.
It is clear that there are various benefits associated with mentorship for women, yet still, “only 37 percent of women have had a mentor in their careers'' (Philip-Lye & Carruthers, 2022). By providing female-specific mentorship programs that ensure women experience the benefits a mentor can provide, companies can help increase gender equity in the workplace.
​
How Female-Specific Mentoring Fits On The Index. While 14 of the 16 companies we found data for on our Index included some mention of a mentorship program, only seven of those companies had programs explicitly designed for women. Research shows that mentorship can provide countless benefits for women; therefore, companies providing female-specific mentorship should be rewarded. We recommend adding female-specific mentorship as an additional criteria in version 1.5 of the WPI Index. While there is no specific key term we identified to standardize scoring, many companies specify that they have mentorship programs for women in a narrative sense or include program names, like Women@ from Google, that delineate who the program is geared towards.
​
Mentorship Suggestion 2: Formal & Informal Mentoring. Another popular question regarding mentoring is if formal or informal mentoring is more effective. According to Ragins & Cotton (1999), “informal mentoring relationships develop spontaneously, whereas formal mentoring relationships develop with organizational assistance or intervention” (p. 529). Formal mentoring programs are a popular strategy taken up by companies to address gender inequality, so it is important that this is found to be more beneficial than informal methods (Blake-Beard, 2001, p. 332).
Research supports informal mentoring programs, finding that protégés experienced increased benefits such as higher overall satisfaction with their mentor, more promotions, and higher wages (Ragins & Cotton, 1999, p. 529). Informal mentoring relationships usually begin “when two people are attracted to one another based on the foundation of perceived similarity” (Blake-Beard, 2001, p. 333), while formal mentors are usually assigned and may lack that natural gravitation towards one another. Moreover, formal mentoring typically lasts one year, and there are assigned meetings. In contrast, informal mentorships can last from three to six years, and participants meet only when they feel it is necessary (Blake-Beard, 2001, p. 333). Therefore, the more genuine relationship built by informal mentoring may yield better results because it is easier to build a friendship, and there is more time to reach career goals (Ragins & Cotton, 1999, p. 531). On the other hand, formal mentoring may reflect the company's interest rather than the mentees, as many formal programs have failed to help marginalized groups advance as they are structured to do (Hansman, 2022, p. 39). However, informal mentoring methods may be less beneficial for women in particular. Given that mentors are often men who select mentees similar to themselves, women are disadvantaged when initiating and participating in informal mentoring (Hansman, 2022, p. 39). Moreover, studies show that women are seen as less desirable mentees because they may have childcare responsibilities that mentors assume will hinder their ability to participate (Hansman, 2022, p. 40). In addition, some male mentors have concerns about sexual innuendos or harassment claims when mentoring a female; therefore, they may be less likely to select a woman as their mentee (Hansman, 2022, p. 45). The lack of women in leadership positions available to act as mentors makes it more difficult for women to develop informal mentoring relationships with other women (Hansman, 2022, p. 46). However, Ragins & Cotton (1999) noted that mentorships of the same gender often “reported receiving more challenging assignments from their mentors when the mentor was formally assigned” (p. 545-6). Therefore, formal mentoring may be better for women entering mentorships with other women, as they receive more challenging work and may have more in common.
Altogether, formal and informal mentoring have pros and cons; therefore, companies should combine both strategies to achieve the best results. Formal mentorships may be best for women but must include informal elements to ensure maximum effectiveness. Ragins & Cotton (1999) suggest that once a selection of mentors and mentees is identified and trained, the company should allow them to choose their mentoring pairs (p. 546). This will allow for a more natural relationship. In addition, Ragins & Cotton (1999) propose that companies use formal mentoring relationships as a catalyst for establishing informal relationships, encouraging mentees to select their mentor at the end of the formal process (p. 546). It is recommended that companies provide training programs to help employees develop informal mentorships (Ragins & Cotton, 1999, p. 546). Research shows that the best mentoring approaches vary by gender and may be most effective when combined.
Paypal, one of the companies on the Index we partnered with, is an excellent example of an effective mentoring program for women. In a study conducted by InHerSight, which surveyed over 90,000 women who provided rankings on 14 criteria for mentorship programs, PayPal’s Unity program was ranked among the highest (Ward, 2016). The study states, “Unity is an employee-led community whose mission is to help women thrive at PayPal, which scores a 4 out of 5 for its mentorship programs overall” (Ward, 2016). According to the company website, “Unity is a group of women and men working together to create more opportunities for women at PayPal. The focus is on gender equality and gender balance” (PayPal, n.d.). The program involves volunteer opportunities, career development, industry events, and meet-ups to share knowledge and hear from role models (PayPal, n.d.). The program serves “100 matched mentor-mentee pairs at any given time. Pairs can be in the same department or different departments and are of mixed gender as well” (Ward, 2016). However, there is more demand for the Unity program than the program can provide in terms of mentors (Ward, 2016). A solution PayPal has employed is to provide peer and group mentoring, pairing a senior leader with 20 mentees who will meet monthly for six months (Ward, 2016). PayPal is an example of a company finding ways to combat a lack of female mentorship and leadership, which other companies can emulate.
​
How Formal & Informal Mentoring Fit On The Index. Overall, 13 companies out of the 16 with mentorship policies on our Index have formal mentorship programs. While formal programs may be better for women, research shows that there are benefits to both informal and formal mentorship. However, in terms of scoring, it is much easier to identify whether or not a company has a mentorship program when it is formal. Therefore, we suggest that the current WPI Index add formal mentoring as a 1.5 criterion, as it is measurable. A key phrase identified in company policies for this criterion is a formal mentorship program; however, many companies also provide specific names for their programs that signify formality.
​
Mentorship Suggestion 3: Follow Best Practices. While it is clear that mentoring benefits women in the workplace, there is debate regarding the effectiveness of cross-gender mentoring relationships. Studies show that women prefer to have other women as their mentors; however, there is a lack of women in leadership positions available to provide that mentorship (Noe, 1988, p. 66). In addition, “a 2012 study found that 138 Fortune 500 companies had no women on their executive team. If potential women mentees at these organizations wait for a female role model to appear before finding a mentor, they will likely be waiting a long time” (Nabine, n.d.). Unfortunately, the lack of women in higher-up positions to provide mentorship opportunities may mean that women will receive mostly male mentors.
Studies show that “female protégés with female mentors were significantly more likely than female protégés with male mentors to engage in after-work, social activities with their mentors” (Ragins & Cotton, 1999, p. 534). In contrast, “female protégés with a history of male mentors earned significantly more than female protégés with a history of female mentors” (Ragins & Cotton, 1999, p. 544). This is likely due to the fact that the current gender disparity in leadership positions places much of the power regarding job advancement in the hands of men. Therefore, since “women may have less power and influence than their male counterparts in the workplace, women mentors may be perceived as less able to propel a protégé to career success” (Hansman, 2022, p. 41). Research suggests that “males hold more centralized, critical positions that give them access to valuable information concerning job openings, pending projects, and managerial positions often shared through the ‘old boy network’” (Noe, 1988, p. 67). However, while men may be able to provide more access to resources and visibility in a male-dominated company, most men are hesitant to select women as their mentees (Hansman, 2022, p. 39). A study revealed that “60% of male managers say they are uncomfortable mentoring or participating in other one-on-one work activities with women” (Nabine, n.d.). Altogether, cross-gender mentoring has pros and cons that affect a woman’s mentorship experience.
In terms of length, formal and informal mentorship relationships are structured differently (Ragins et al., 2000, p. 1179). Informal mentorships are not structured; therefore, mentors and mentees can meet when they want or feel necessary (p. 1179). Informal relationships typically last longer, from three to six years (p. 1179). Formal relationships usually last a specified amount, from six months to one year, and differ depending on the location and frequency of meetings (p. 1179). However, Ragins et al. (2000) points out that “the shorter duration of a formal mentoring relationship may reduce the opportunity for the mentor to influence the protege's career and work attitudes” (p. 1179).
Thirdly, a study by Ragins et al. (2000) of 1,162 employees also revealed that mentees in mentorship programs report higher satisfaction in programs that involve mentors from departments different from their own (p. 1189). Therefore, mentorship programs should be open to multiple departments to maximize efficacy.
​
How Best Practices Fit On The Index. While most companies on our current Index do not provide specifics regarding cross-gender mentoring, the length of the program, or which departments the program is open to, these elements are still essential to consider. The structure of a company's mentorship program may not be a measurable criteria in version 1.5; this information may be collected once the WPI Index has developed relationships with companies and more credibility. In later versions of the Index, companies with mentorship programs that provide cross-gender opportunities, are an appropriate length, and are open to multiple departments should receive a positive score on the Index.
​
​
Intersectionality in the Workspace. Intersectional inequality is highly prevalent in numerous companies due to diversity, equity, and inclusion blindspots that can occur. According to Clarasys, an international business consulting firm, “traditional DEI initiatives often split the race agenda from the gender agenda, potentially missing the interaction of race and gender” (Casey, 2020, p.1). Consequently, racialized and gendered experiences are sometimes overlooked or prioritized, which can marginalize those that experience multiple intersecting identities. This is especially evident in the case of Black women in the workforce. Based on the 2021 United States Census, a Black woman makes 58 cents per dollar earned by a white male, and the accumulated pay gap costs the average Black woman “upwards of $900,000 throughout a 40-year career” (Bakare, 2022, p.1). To achieve more intersectional justice in the workspace, DEI experts suggest increasing intersectional diversity amongst high-up executives, educating employees on the importance of intersectionality, and integrating intersectionality throughout company policies. The Center for Intersectional Justice argues that examining the pay gap alone, without including factors such as class, race, and ability, “will likely reinforce inequalities among women”. When creating future versions of the index including an intersectional lens will be essential to assessing equity in the workplace for all women.
​
Implementing Intersectionality on Future Versions of the Index. When creating future versions of the index, including an intersectional lens will be essential to assessing equity in the workplace for all women. As aforementioned the current version of the index does not account for other measures of diversity among women, which can overgeneralize experiences among women in companies.
​
Buzz Words
The index holds companies accountable through public reporting on their progress toward gender diversity and inclusion goals. For example, the Human Rights Campaign's Corporate Equality Index assesses companies based on their policies and practices related to LGBTQ+ inclusion and publishes an annual report ranking companies' progress (CEI, 2022). Similarly, the Diversity Best Practices Inclusion Index assesses companies based on their diversity and inclusion efforts and publishes an annual report highlighting best practices and areas for improvement (Dupont, 2018). Public reporting and ranking can incentivize companies to take concrete steps towards improvement, as it creates pressure to improve rankings and demonstrate progress towards diversity and inclusion goals. However, some critics argue that public ranking systems can create a "check-the-box" mentality, where companies focus on meeting the minimum requirements for inclusion rather than truly committing to diversity and inclusion as a core value. When the index ranks companies, it must beware of companies possibly using buzzwords as a marketing tool without an established action plan to back it up.
​
Misinterpretation of Buzz Words. Some people misinterpret the word diversity or use it narrowly or superficially. Is a company diverse if five white women and five white men are on the board? Or if they have five black men and five white men? Where do we hold the threshold for whether a company is diverse? Diversity refers to the differences among people, including race, ethnicity, gender, sexual orientation, age, ability, religion, culture, socioeconomic status, and more (FSU). It encompasses various characteristics and experiences that make individuals unique and valuable. However, some people may interpret diversity in a limited way, focusing only on visible differences such as race or gender or failing to recognize the importance of diversity in all areas of life, including education, employment, and social interactions. Additionally, some people may view diversity as a "problem" that needs to be solved rather than as a strength and a source of innovation and creativity (HBR, 2016). When a company claims to be “diverse,” it must give accurate numbers and examples of why that is true.
​
Using Buzz Words to Create Action Plans. Addressing these issues requires a multifaceted approach beyond increasing representation (Forbes, 2019). Companies must also recognize drawbacks like unequal pay, lack of upward mobility, and workplace discrimination. In addition, creating a culture that values and respects diversity is crucial for ensuring that employees from all backgrounds feel supported and included in the workplace. We must consider how different forms of identity and oppression intersect and impact people's experiences in the workplace and beyond. This may involve addressing issues like microaggressions and implicit bias and creating a culture of accountability where employees feel comfortable reporting discrimination or harassment.
​
Part III: Raising Awareness For The WPI Index
Our thesis project's third and final section focuses on raising awareness for the Women’s Power and Influence Index. For the Index to achieve its goal of inciting behavior change through social pressure, we have to get people involved. We participated in various activities, from hosting events to creating Tik-Toks. The more eyes on the Index, the more companies will feel they must score high to maintain a positive reputation.
​
TikTok Outreach and Awareness
A few members of our team created attention-grabbing questions to ask around the campus of Arizona State University-Tempe. We asked the following questions:
1. Who was the first female vice president of the United States?
2. Who are three women that inspire you?
3. How many years do you think it will take for women to attain equal pay?
Some of the questions we asked were focused on raising awareness for the Women’s Power and Influence Index, while others were focused on exposing the lack of information about gender-related issues/topics in the general public. When asked how long it would take for women to gain equal pay, many people estimated less than 20 years when the reality is 151 years. This demonstrates how people underestimate deep-rooted gender equity issues. Through our Tik Toks, we have generated over 1,500 views and generated meaningful conversations surrounding gender equity, which thoroughly aligns with the Difference Engine’s belief that “public behavior ignites social change.”
​
ASIG
The Annual Solutions for Inequality Gathering was held on March 15th, 2023, in the Herald Examiner Building, Downtown Los Angeles. The gathering brought all members of The Difference Engine together, including the Executive Board, Board of advisors, faculty, student researchers, and Standards and Review Committee members, to network and discuss the progress made on the research on the Women’s Power Index. Our team has made tremendous progress on the criteria research and introducing the 1.5 version of the index to increase the nuance of the scoring system.
The student researchers participated in a mini grand challenge as a part of the agenda and were split into teams. The challenge was coming up with a solution for the socioeconomic and environmental issues in Los Angeles (LA): air pollution and the public transport system. These two are one of the more significant issues faced by locals. With LA being such a big and busy city, the public transport system does not do it justice. The buses are only taken by low-income families, minorities, and the elderly. Since the public transportation system is an inefficient for people to commute, most people drive cars. As a result, this increases the emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. The teams were challenged to pitch their solutions in a presentation covering the feasibility of the solution, purpose, goal, and product marketing. The winning solution was an app incentivizing people to use public transportation. Their idea was to partner with food companies that would also benefit from this app, such as Chipotle.
​
PayPal Meeting
The WPI Team aims to partner with willing companies before their release on the WPI Index to discuss their gender equity policies and scores. By working with established companies, the WPI Index will increase its credibility and allow companies to engage with us and receive direct feedback. We were able to establish a relationship with the money-sharing app PayPal. Members of our WPI Team set up an online meeting with PayPal employees to discuss how they scored on version 1 and how we anticipate they will score as the Index progresses. First, our WPI team members discussed what the Index is, how scoring works, how data is collected, and the future directions of the WPI Index. Next, the thesis team discussed the binary criterion in detail. We discussed what each criterion constitutes, how PayPal scored, and how they compare to other companies on the Index. We incorporated the new criterion, discussed in part II, in our analyses to give PayPal an idea about how their scores may change as the Index progresses. We also developed a set of questions about particular criteria we would like to know more about which we were able to discuss with the Paypal team. The questions were as follows:
1. We were unable to locate PayPal’s harassment and discrimination training. Will PayPal start making more data publicly available?
2. Based on our ‘20 and ‘21 data collection, PayPal scored low amongst peers in recruitment efforts to retain women. In our ‘22 and ‘23 data collection will we find that Paypal is doing more to attract women?
3. What policies at PayPal are you proud of? What would you change or create to build a more equitable workplace at PayPal?
Concerning the first question, PayPal explained how their policy for harassment and discrimination training does exist and pointed to where it can be found. We explained that the purpose of the Index is to encourage companies to be as public and transparent about their policies as possible so future employees do not have to search far and wide to find this critical information. We discussed how we balance the importance of capturing all public information from companies with encouraging companies to be more forthright with their policies. Regarding question two, we learned that PayPal expects to see more women retained at the company in the ‘22 and ‘23 data collection of the Index, as they have increased recruitment efforts. We then learned more about the PayPal Unity program, which provides opportunities for women to progress in their leadership skills. Altogether, the meeting with PayPal was a success, and creating a partnership allows us to improve together. In addition, competitors will likely take notice of the steps PayPal is taking to achieve gender equality and feel motivated to do the same. Furthermore, partnering with well-known and respected companies helps increase WPI Index's legitimacy. We hope to continue having these conversations and sharing them publicly to raise awareness for the Index.
​
Conclusion
Through the thorough analysis and literature review of each criteria, it is clear that gender inequity is a multi-faceted, complex, and pervasive issue interweaved in the fabric of the economy and society. Throughout our research, it is clear that gender equitable practices expand beyond the experience of individual women or companies but rather impact whole economies. Numerous sources found that companies with gender-equitable, “family-friendly,” and equitable policies outperform their competitors in all facets of company success. However, many companies still lack adequate gender equitable policies, as evidenced in the review of each criterion.
In the pursuit of fostering gender equity in companies, there remain numerous barriers that directly impact a woman’s participation in the workplace, especially in some male-dominated industries. Some of these obstacles include a lack of representation, negative intersectional stereotypes that foster implicit bias, discrimination, and, ultimately, institutional shortcomings. For example, the gender pay gap and prevalence of sexual harassment within companies have significantly hindered women in the workplace. According to the Harvard Business Review, limitations may be explicit, through negative and hostile attitudes toward women, or implicit, through unintentional behaviors that have repercussions on a woman’s experience in a company (Bakare, 2022, p.1).
Additionally, women face numerous structural limitations such as microaggressions, glass cliffs, pay gap, gender bias, reduced investments, and other obstacles that impede a woman’s access to specific opportunities based on gender. These structural barriers are further exacerbated through an intersectional lens and are vital to consider when expanding the Women’s Power and Influence Index. To strategically and sustainably address gender equity the Harvard Business Review recommends a series of steps, which include identifying the issue, collecting data, creating a roadmap to address the issue, communicating goals, and periodically evaluating progress. It is important to note that the Women’s Power and Influence Index has already taken many steps toward sustainable change.
A primary tool in combating gender inequity is comprehensive gender equity metrics, achieved through the continuously evolving criteria that the Women’s Power and Influence Index utilizes. As the index continues to expand, adding more sub-criteria to assess companies better will be essential to the growth and success of the index. Additionally, as a project that uses a public ranking system, consistently raising awareness about the index through social media marketing, partnerships with companies, and an easy-to-navigate website are essential to the index’s impact. For example, including a tab on the website for current news about the index and other related news can aid in increasing traffic on the website. Another way to further contextualize the index is through a digital database that provides literature surrounding the criterion, the companies, gender equitable practices, and other relevant topic areas. A final asset that the Women’s Power and Influence Index has already implemented and should continue to expand is a standards and review committee. Employing an interdisciplinary standards and review committee ensures the WPI remains focused on the project's goals, easily comprehensible, accessible, and adaptive to the changing climate of gender equity.
The Women’s Power and Influence Index has immense potential to address inequity within companies tangibly and ultimately affect social change through this product. Gender equity is a pressing injustice issue that impacts individuals, companies, and entire nations, which places the Women’s Power and Influence Index at the forefront of addressing inequity and rebuilding a more just system for women in the workplace.
​
References
AARP. (2020, May 14). Caregiving in the United States 2020. AARP.
https://www.aarp.org/ppi/info-2020/caregiving-in-the-united-states.html.
Admin. (2015, October 18). Success! Google offers health care coverage to transgender employees. Retrieved April 12, 2023, from https://transgenderlawcenter.org/archives/396 Airbnb. (2022, 4 August). Airbnb named to the Parity.Org Best Companies for Women to Advance List.
https://news.airbnb.com/airbnb-named-to-the-parity-org-best-companies-for-women-to-a dvance-list/
Aragão, C. (2023, March 1). Gender pay gap in U.S. hasn’t changed much in two decades. Pew Research Center.
https://www.pewresearch.org/fact-tank/2023/03/01/gender-pay-gap-facts/ Asare, J. G. (2019, December 14). 9 diversity and inclusion practices to leave in 2019. Forbes. Retrieved April 9, 2023, from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/janicegassam/2019/12/14/9-diversity-and-inclusion-practice s-to-leave-in-2019/?sh=459f829bd49c
Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs (ASPA). (2023, January 23). Fact sheet: Celebrating the affordable care act. HHS.gov. Retrieved April 28, 2023, from
https://www.hhs.gov/about/news/2022/03/18/fact-sheet-celebrating-affordable-care-act.ht ml
ASU News. (2021, February 11). ASU launches 'The Difference Engine: An ASU center for the future of equality'.
https://news.asu.edu/20210211-asu-launches-difference-engine-asu-center-future-equality
79
Aydın, Ö., & Karaarslan, E. (2023). Is Chatgpt leading generative ai? What is beyond expectations? SSRN Electronic Journal. https://doi.org/10.2139/ssrn.4341500 Bakare, L. (2022, September 21). How Black Women Can Navigate Pay-Gap Gaslighting. Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/2022/09/how-black-women-can-navigate-pay-gap-gaslighting Barker, S. (2022, January 27). Council post: Why community engagement is a crucial piece of a thriving company culture. Retrieved April 12, 2023, from
https://www.forbes.com/sites/forbestechcouncil/2022/01/26/why-community-engagement -is-a-crucial-piece-of-a-thriving-company-culture/?sh=6923d2b25e90
Barnard-Bahn, A. (2020, November 3). How to identify - and fix - pay inequality at your company. Harvard Business Review.
https://hbr.org/2020/11/how-to-identify-and-fix-pay-inequality-at-your-company Bates, K. G. (2018, July 31). A look back at Trayvon Martin's death, and the movement it inspired. Retrieved April 27, 2023, from
https://www.npr.org/sections/codeswitch/2018/07/31/631897758/a-look-back-at-trayvon martins-death-and-the-movement-it-inspired
Becton, J. B., Gilstrap, J. B., & Forsyth, M. (2017). Preventing and correcting workplace harassment: Guidelines for employers. Business Horizons, 60(1), 101–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bushor.2016.09.005
Bell, M. P., Quick, J. C., & Cycyota, C. S. (2002). Assessment and Prevention of Sexual Harassment of Employees: An Applied Guide to Creating Healthy Organizations. International Journal of Selection and Assessment, 10(1-2), 160–167.
https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-2389.00203
80
Bentley University. (2023, January 26). 7 ways to promote diversity, equity and inclusion in the Workplace. Retrieved April 28, 2023, from
https://www.bentley.edu/news/7-ways-promote-diversity-workplace
Biogen. (n.d.). Diversity, equity & inclusion.
https://www.biogen.com/responsibility/diversity-inclusion.html
Blake-Beard, S. D. (2001). Taking a hard look at formal mentoring programs: A consideration of potential challenges facing women. The Journal of Management Development, 20(4), 331–345. https://doi.org/10.1108/02621710110388983
Buchanan, L., Bui, Q., Patel, J. K. (2020, July 3). Black lives matter may be the largest movement in U.S. history. The New York Times. Retrieved April 9, 2023, from https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2020/07/03/us/george-floyd-protests-crowd-size.ht ml
Casey, T. (2022, November 18). What Is Intersectionality and Why Is It Important in the Workplace? Clarasys International Business Consultancy.
https://www.clarasys.com/en-us/what-is-intersectionality-and-why-is-it-important-in-the workplace/
Catalyst. (2022, August 29). Women in the workforce: United States (quick take). Retrieved April 28, 2023, from https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-in-the-workforce-united-states/ Catalyst. (2023, February 7). Pyramid: Women in the United States workforce (infographic). Retrieved April 28, 2023, from
https://www.catalyst.org/research/women-in-sp-500-companies/
CDC. (n.d.). Professional development: Follow-up support tool kit - CDC. Retrieved April 28, 2023, from https://www.cdc.gov/healthyschools/tths/followup_toolkit-508.pdf