Episode 18 – Part 1: What is Diversity, Equity and Inclusion and how are we performing as an industry? With Sybil Taunton, RICS

The following transcript is autogenerated so may contain errors.

Matt Nally 

In this week’s episode, we’re speaking to Sybil, who is the Head of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion at the RICS. So thanks for coming on.

Sybil Taunton 

Thank you for having me.

Matt Nally 

Anytime. Would you like to, I suppose, give us a bit of background as to what your role in the RICS, is and obviously that’ll give the context, I think, for the rest of the conversation. 

Sybil Taunton  

Yeah, absolutely. So, like, you know, Edi or dei leaders within an organisation, one of our firms that are looking predominantly internally at how the business operates, I do look at those things. And I collaborate closely with our HR team and other business leaders within the organisation. But I’ve been put in this role to really look at dei for the entirety of our membership. So looking at how we can support our firms, how we can leverage the best practice and the expertise that exists in the industry, bring that in house, and then reflect that back out to the membership so that everyone can can learn collectively do better collectively. So a lot of how I’ll speak to this today, and answer the questions today comes from that perspective of looking externally, versus getting in the weeds of internal best practice.

Matt Nally  

Perfect. And so I suppose if we start with the basics, what, what does Diversity Equity and Inclusion cover? Because I think there’s, there’s so many things we obviously talk about day to day now. And it’s hard, it’s hard to keep track of potentially what the meaning a bit of different things that are so good to start with as a base. 

Sybil Taunton 

Yeah, absolutely. I, we just had some, like all employee vision events, for our organisation, and that was actually the focus of, of my briefing, when given the platform is to really unpack the acronym. And so happy to do that now. Because I think when we look at what is happening in the space, and a lot of what people are focused on, it’s purely that diversity piece, which is just representation, it’s its data, it’s that you know, makeup of who it is that exists within our organisation within the membership within the wider industry. That’s it, it’s just the data piece. So if we’re only focusing on improving representation, what we’re missing really vital pieces of the conversation, which comes in with equity and the inclusion part of it. And so I think it’s really important to recognise that diversity just means data and representation. And so and having difference amongst that, you know, any sort of population, so why we need equity and inclusion is making sure that if we’re putting in all this work to recruit diverse talent into our organisations and, and the wider industry, that we actually have the means to keep them retain them promote, develop. Otherwise, we’re just create this revolving door where talent comes in and leaves again, because they don’t feel the psychological, you know, or physical safety, working in a space because the culture isn’t quite right, or the policies aren’t quite right, to ensure that they get the access and development that they need. So when we look at equity, that’s where we we start drilling into our processes or practices or policies, and we go right, who’s getting left behind in this? Who are we missing? You know, are they is everything that we’re doing accessible for everyone? You know, when it comes to disability, and neurodiversity? You know, it? Are we taking a deliberate look at every individual in our organisation and making sure they have the development opportunities, they deserve the access to promotion that they deserve. You know, are we being as equitable as we could be in the way that we recruit for talent? Or are we constantly looking at the same universities that crank out the same standard pipeline of students and not opening our aperture to other academic institutions? Or are we hiring local talent from the communities that we serve? You know, asking those questions of are we being deliberate? And are we asking ourselves who could possibly be left behind in this? That’s the equity piece, and I think that term gets confused sometimes. And I had posted about this recently on on LinkedIn. It gets confused sometimes one with the word equality, they’re different. Those are two different words meaning different things. You know, equality is that ideal end state we hope to get to as a society idea where regardless of who you are, where you come from who you love, you know that you’re going to have equal opportunity to education to health care, you know, to career success. That’s the ideal end state. Equity is the vehicle that gets us there. It’s like I said, taking those deliberate steps, having those deliberate conversations about who may be getting left behind, and then making adjustments to correct that. And so what it is is looking at, rather than, you know, I think the confusion that comes in is that sometimes people hear the word equity, and they think unfair advantages, we have to just start handing out unfair advantages, you’re only promoting those people because of where they’re from, or, or what they look like, you know, that’s not what equity is, equity is about recognising where the disadvantages are, and making deliberate efforts, taking deliberate efforts to remove them, it’s not about handing out unfair advantages. So I think it’s really, really important. And I will get on a soapbox for hours on the importance of the equity and in really understanding what it means, but I’ll leave it there on that one. And then inclusion is, is the core is the meat of the conversation that I think we need, as an industry to have more of a, of a conversation about and, and really, that comes down to culture is the culture within our industry, where it needs to be to make every individual from every background, feel welcomed, feel valued, and feel like they have the opportunities they deserve to thrive, succeed, and, you know, in in the industry, and I would say we’re not there, and I think plenty of people will agree with there, there are plenty of historical institutional behaviours that still need some adjusting, you know, and so I think that’s the conversation we really shouldn’t be having, as an industry is, how do we get our culture in a better place where everyone working within the built and natural environment, everyone working within surveying is educating themselves developing themselves, and opening their minds to understanding views and perspectives other than their own. And then that takes deliberate effort. So the increasing and improving the diversity pieces, while it takes a tonne of work is the easy part. The equity and the inclusion part are where we really need to roll up our sleeves, and I think do a better job of collectively and focusing in those areas.

Matt Nally 

It’s really interesting, I think one of the things that made me think as well, when I was reading some of your posts was the I don’t know, the, the assumption just I think, because it’s so much in the news around, it’s probably to do with gender or race or the religious aspects. And I completely forgot that it obviously might include things like disability, just just because of the amount of noise in noises or a word, but the amount of airtime other aspects of handover, maybe that one, for example. And it changes, obviously. But it made me sort of rethink how that how the conversation could go, obviously, today around thinking through that better. What, what does it look like, I suppose in terms of how do we know that we’re going in the right direction? So for example, what does the ideal outcome look like? Is it? Is it? You know, everyone’s represented equally across, you know, different, there’s different factors? Or will there always be a certain imbalance in terms of, I don’t know, natural preference towards things? And therefore, does that built in? Or how do? How do we know what we’re striving towards? I suppose, is my question.

Sybil Taunton 

That’s a really great question. And that’s where the importance of data comes in. And so data is absolutely vital. And getting this right, every EDI dei strategy should be built around a foundation of data. And I think that’s what we’re lacking in our industry. And a lot of organisations are on there. And they’re starting to queue in on this of, you know, especially in the UK, you absolutely can and should be asking your employees, who they are and what they bring to the table, because you know, especially across the the the protected characteristics within the equalities act, you are allowed to ask those questions and you should be, you know, so find out within your organisation what the gender breakdown is, you know, both biological, you know, gender, that binary biological gender, but also, you know, the wider spectrum of gender identities should be asking about sexual orientation, about disabilities, about ethnicity, about religious and no preference, those those types of things like you can and should be asking those questions. And so using that data, helps you understand the makeup of your organisation. And then and then the important piece is knowing what you’re comparing it to. So some of the work we’re doing at rsgs is is building layers of data that make that those comparisons a bit more manageable, because right now, let’s say you You work in a in a surveying firm, and you’ve collected data on your organisation. The comparator that exists right now is, is National Office of National Statistics data from the census, that’s going to feel incredibly daunting and overwhelming to go right. According to the national census, the population across these demographic characteristics are at these levels. Holy cow, how are we going to get there? Because within the surveying, our levels aren’t there. So our ICS can provide, you know, so here’s your firm RSCs is collecting data from surveyors, individually, so that we can say, okay, across the surveying profession in the UK, because we can ask all these questions, here’s what we look like. So then a firm can go right, if this is what overall surveying looks like, here’s what we should be striving toward, we’ve got this comparator. Now, that doesn’t help all of our firms who have a range of talents, they’re not just made up of surveyors. So we look at our real estate firms or our construction firms, they’re going to need a different kind of comparative data set. And that’s where the supply chain sustainability schools dei survey comes into play. So we’re encouraging our firms to fill out that survey. And then that builds industry benchmarks and comparative data sets. So then, a firm that has a makeup of different types of professions say it’s a real estate firm, they can go right, here’s what the makeup of our organisation looks like, because we’re finally collecting this data. And now here’s what overarching real estate numbers are looking at, let’s set our targets based off of that. So then it’s a little less daunting than going, Okay, we’re trying to achieve national general population standards, which is unrealistic like and that gets to your point of is it going to be balanced, we have to have equal representation across all demographics, that’s going to be impossible to achieve, because the populations that we’re operating within are not balanced across all demographics. So it’s really about understanding datasets, and knowing where you are. And then having something reasonable manageable to compare that to, so we’re really doing that foundational work trying to create those layers. But yeah, any any firm, trying to give a good crack at getting this right, needs to be able to measure progress. And the way they do that is, is through data. And that’s not just going I mean, a piece of that is the measuring who’s in our organisation. But that, again, is just the representation part, you can also measure how long are they staying in the organisation? How long is it taking us to develop and promote people across demographic groups, everything about the DEI space can be measured. And I think, you know, too often targets are set on that representation piece. And then we’re not setting targets based off of all of the rest of it, which is all about how do you retain that talent? You know, that you’re bringing into your organisation? So hopefully that answers your question, you know, in a meaningful way, but really, it all comes down to data. And if your organisation isn’t collecting it, you should be. And so and we’re happy to help, you know, firms with the question sets, we’ve done a lot of work with our fellow professional body partners in establishing, you know, a SET questionnaire that aligns with ons data. So so there are competitors. And so we can help people on that journey. I think the the sticky part comes for firms that are operating internationally, because you can’t ask the same questions everywhere. And I think that’s why we get caught up. And, you know, too often the conversation on dei becomes about binary gender, because that’s seems to be the only thing we can talk about globally. Everything else gets quite tricky, sticky, depending on what region you’re discussing that in but but even then there are datasets that can be collected globally. And those are the conversations we should be having as well, rather than saying, it’s too complicated, we’re not doing it. We should be going right collectively as an industry, what can we measure? And why are we not measuring that?

Matt Nally 

Yep. Thanks. You mentioned some metrics already. There in terms of getting started, are they better ones to? I don’t know, that’s the right word. But are there better ones start focusing on to begin with in terms of making headway into understanding your position and where to go.

Sybil Taunton 

Yep, I think at the very least for firms operating in the UK, you should be collecting across all demographic, all the protected characteristics. I know there’s a lot of organisations that want to look at social mobility. That’s a complicated one. There are a variety of ways you can collect that data, and a variety of questions that you could ask, but no matter what, there’s no one question that gets you at social mobility. And so that’s a really complicated one. But I would say at the very, very least, every organisation in the UK and Ireland should be collecting across all the protected characteristics. And you know, it it’s not compulsory. Well, you know, we can’t force people to answer those questions. It is still personal, private data. But you should give people the opportunity to say this is who I am and this is what I bring to your organisation. Um, so that yeah, organisations can set those those baselines for themselves and understand who actually works in their organisation. I think we find it challenging, you know, reporting rates of disability is one, that’s a, that’s a tough one. Disclosure rates are often low on that one. And I think that comes back to the culture piece, do your employees feel safe enough to tell you who they are? And so I think running the exercise of asking if employers find that people are not wanting to disclose that data, that should send up a big flag that our employees don’t feel safe enough to disclose that data to us? How can we do some work here to to fix that and to change that. So no matter what it’s a good exercise to run, to ask these things, obviously, small and micro firms are going to be up against it, because their teams are going to be so small that being able to protect that privacy is going to be really challenging. With a small data set, people will be identified, because if you only have, you know, five people working in your firm, you’re going to know whose data is what bait just based off of who you see sitting around you. So that that That’s tricky. But there’s still a conversation to be had around dei for those small firms that isn’t just about data.

Matt Nally 

It’s an interesting point, though, about the openness of the business culture generally. Because if people aren’t willing to bring that up as part of that discussion, then there’s a lot of things that might not be being discussed, generally day to day about improvements of the business or employment, morale, that type of stuff. So it feeds into a lot of other aspects. You mentioned appoint around people that mess maybe misunderstanding the sort of positive discrimination aspects. I don’t use those terms, specifically. But I think that’s what you’re alluding to. The RAF, obviously, recently will one group that that was in the news recently, for that type of thing be on the wrong side of things from a legal perspective, how do you avoid that sort of potential route? Once you’ve once you’ve set your understanding where you are, and you’re looking at where you want to get to in terms of improving that DIY aspect? How do you do it in a way that is inclusive? And isn’t, you know, the wrong side of that line? If that makes sense?

Sybil Taunton 

Yeah, absolutely. I think I think the conversation is, don’t get in the business of hiring people because of what they look like, or where they come from, you know, like, because that’s where we get in, in uncomfortable territory, and no professional wants to be hired into a role because of the colour of their skin, or their religious beliefs, you know, or their sexual orientation. You know, no one wants to be that token hire, they want to be hired, because they’re an excellent candidate, and they deserve the role. And they’ve, and they’ve worked for it. So I think the way to, to not get down that rabbit hole, is if you’ve taken your data set, and you go right, here’s where our big gap is, we’re really, really lacking ethnic representation, you know, diversity of ethnicity in our organisation, then that’s having deliberate conversations about how you recruit for talent to bring in a pool of more diverse candidates. If you’re having the conversation once you’ve already had your shortlist. And you recognise it’s all, you know, white men between the ages of 30 and 55. And you go oh sugar, like, we’ve got this homogenous group again, but you’ve already done the shortlist. And you’ve already done the recruitment, that’s too late to be looking at it, you know, it’s got to be all the way back into what kinds of recruitment firms are we working with? You know, what kinds of networks are we partnering with? Because there’s a lot of fantastic networks, you know, looking to support organisations in the built environment to do better in this space, like, are we deliberately recruiting differently than we have in the past? And if the answer is no, then we’re not going to see a different pool of candidates, we’re going to keep getting the same kind of talent coming in. So it’s about making those changes as early as possible in the process, and trying to do some deliberate recruitment in those areas. And, and yeah, like I said, just making sure it’s, it doesn’t become a conversation of, we’re only going to, you know, recruit ethnic minorities, and that’s it, we’re not going to interview anyone else, you know, you could go down that road, but it’s gonna start getting tricky and uncomfortable, you know, and so I think if a firm’s really aren’t, aren’t sure if they know they have some deliberate targets they want to try and meet then I would say the best bet is to work with a consultant because a consultant can make sure that they talk through all the fine details really look at okay, what are you trying to achieve here? And then, you know, do that in the most ethical responsible way possible, you know, that still supports a firm and in trying to achieve the targets are trying to achieve without going down that, you know, affirmative action positive discrimination route that is that sometimes can be good. But it’s a slippery slope into getting into, like I said, people feeling like they’ve been hired into an organisation just because of who they are and not the expert expertise and experience they bring to the table. And so yeah, that’s a really complicated one, for sure.