TY - JOUR
T1 - Building a framework for inclusion in health services research
T2 - Development of and pre-implementation faculty and staff attitudes toward the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) plan at Mayo Clinic
AU - Enders, Felicity T.
AU - Golembiewski, Elizabeth H.
AU - Pacheco-Spann, Laura M.
AU - Allyse, Megan
AU - Mielke, Michelle M.
AU - Balls-Berry, Joyce E.
N1 - Funding Information:
The members of the diversity and inclusion task force were instrumental in developing the initial version of this plan. Together with Dr. Enders and Dr. Allyse, these were Brandon Williams, Ruchi Gupta, Brenda Ginos, Sean Phelan, PhD, Rickey Carter, PhD, and Susan Hallbeck, PhD.
Funding Information:
Conflicts of Interest. Dr. Mielke receives research funding from the National Institutes of Health, an unrestricted research grant from Biogen, and consults for Brain Protection Company. The other authors have no conflicts of interest to declare.
Publisher Copyright:
© The Association for Clinical and Translational Science 2021.
PY - 2021
Y1 - 2021
N2 - Objective: To mitigate the impact of racism, sexism, and other systemic biases, it is essential for organizations to develop strategies to address their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) climates. The objective of this formative evaluation was to assess Mayo Clinic Department of Health Sciences Research (HSR) faculty and staff perceptions toward a proposed departmental DEI plan and to explore findings by diversity and professional subgroups. Materials and methods: Key plan components include recruitment and support for diverse individuals; training for all HSR employees and leaders; and a review system to capture diversity and inclusion feedback for leaders. Additional activities include building inclusion “nudges” into existing performance reviews. To assess pre-implementation beliefs about specific plan components, we polled attendees at a departmental staff meeting in July 2020. Results: Overall, respondents (n = 162) commonly endorsed a blinded promotion review process and DEI training for all staff and leaders as most important. In contrast, respondents expressed less support for plan activities related to “nudges.” However, attitudes among certain diversity or professional groups toward specific plan activities diverged from their non-diversity group counterparts. Qualitative feedback indicated awareness of the need to address DEI issues. Discussion: Overall, HSR faculty and staff respondents conveyed support for the plan. However, some specific plan activities were perceived differently by members of certain diversity or professional subgroups. Conclusion: These findings present a DEI framework on which other institutions can build and point to future directions for how DEI activities may be differentially perceived by impacted faculty and staff.
AB - Objective: To mitigate the impact of racism, sexism, and other systemic biases, it is essential for organizations to develop strategies to address their diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) climates. The objective of this formative evaluation was to assess Mayo Clinic Department of Health Sciences Research (HSR) faculty and staff perceptions toward a proposed departmental DEI plan and to explore findings by diversity and professional subgroups. Materials and methods: Key plan components include recruitment and support for diverse individuals; training for all HSR employees and leaders; and a review system to capture diversity and inclusion feedback for leaders. Additional activities include building inclusion “nudges” into existing performance reviews. To assess pre-implementation beliefs about specific plan components, we polled attendees at a departmental staff meeting in July 2020. Results: Overall, respondents (n = 162) commonly endorsed a blinded promotion review process and DEI training for all staff and leaders as most important. In contrast, respondents expressed less support for plan activities related to “nudges.” However, attitudes among certain diversity or professional groups toward specific plan activities diverged from their non-diversity group counterparts. Qualitative feedback indicated awareness of the need to address DEI issues. Discussion: Overall, HSR faculty and staff respondents conveyed support for the plan. However, some specific plan activities were perceived differently by members of certain diversity or professional subgroups. Conclusion: These findings present a DEI framework on which other institutions can build and point to future directions for how DEI activities may be differentially perceived by impacted faculty and staff.
KW - Diversity
KW - academic medicine
KW - equity
KW - inclusion
KW - organizational culture
UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85105578563&partnerID=8YFLogxK
U2 - 10.1017/cts.2020.575
DO - 10.1017/cts.2020.575
M3 - Article
C2 - 34007470
AN - SCOPUS:85105578563
SN - 2059-8661
VL - 5
JO - Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
JF - Journal of Clinical and Translational Science
IS - 1
M1 - e88
ER -