GR
Translation of the original article: Charalampos Skoulakis
The concept of inclusion is being discussed more and more lately in various work environments. However, it hasn´t been given the attention it should have until now. When referring to inclusion, we mean the equal participation of individuals from every social group in the work sector. In other words, not to exclude anyone from potential opportunities just because he/she/they belong to a social group that is considered subordinate or less competent. Despite one should not even have to argue why inclusion and diversity at work are essential and beneficiary for everyone, we shall take a closer look at those whys.
What does the research show us?
- Diverse and inclusive work environments are two times more likely to reach or even exceed their financial goals, six times more likely to be innovative, and six times more likely to predict change correctly.
- Inclusive and diverse teams are more innovative, participatory, and creative.
- Companies that invest in diversity have more loyal and happier customers.
Therefore, environments accessible to disabled —and not only— employees enhance company profitability. That seems only reasonable: on the one hand, the more diverse the perspectives of a team’s members are, the more likely it is for that team to come up with original ideas and solutions to its problems; on the other hand, people from excluded social groups, such as the disabled, have to hone constantly their creativity to survive. And this is something inconceivable for the privileged part of our society.
Customer Loyalty & Representation
When it comes to customer loyalty, one can merely consider that when a company invests in the diversity of its employees, a broader range of customers can relate to them. This way, the company can expand its clientele, secure an economic advantage, and have an edge over its competitors. This advantage is strengthened further if these competitors do not emphasize inclusion as much but rather reproduce a uniform corporate status quo. Notably, more and more people choose to support companies that clearly show their human side, not only with CSR actions but also with the direct staffing of positions inside their companies with people who belong to vulnerable social groups. P&G is an excellent example of such a company, as they rank among the top companies for people with disability. Conversely, individuals who experience underrepresentation tend to reject companies that do not take them and their needs into account. A typical example is the United Kingdom, where businesses lose around £17 billion from the disabled public yearly due to the lack of accessibility.
Unemployment
Inclusion is particularly critical for a much more fundamental reason: as long as it is not secured, the monster called unemployment thrives.
The disabled, due to the stigma and insecurity of employers regarding their recruitment, are plagued by unemployment at overwhelmingly higher rates than the non-disabled. For example, in the United States in 2019, the percentage of disabled people working was 19.3% compared to 66.3% for non-disabled people. That means that 4 out of 5 people with disability are not working. The possible causes for that interweave. In a recently published paper, Pagano explains the vicious circle of sciolism and lack of knowledge regarding disability issues, the stigma that still accompanies them, and the existing fear of employers that people with disability are untrustworthy in the workplace (Pagano, 2021). Consequently, this is how a pool of willing talents remains unexploited due to stereotypes.
Any substantial changes?
Despite hiring people driven by diversity being mandatory, this legal commitment does not seem to have the desired results. If changes in legislation are not flanked by meaningful changes in social consciousness regarding the value of diversity, they will remain a “bogeyman” to which companies will only seemingly comply. In reality, discrimination is perpetuated within the work environment due to still prevailing misconceptions. This problem calls for the implementation of inclusion and diversity programs so that the work environments can evolve and smoothly assimilate previously excluded individuals. Through the professional conciliation of disabled and non-disabled people, it will become clear that disabled workers can be productive, as long as employers also understand the benefits of diversity and focus on people rather than their percentages and corporate profile. Only when hiring disabled people is perceived as an opportunity and not a legal obligation will it become possible to reap the benefits of such a choice and witness professional development for the people that need it the most.
