How to support EDI work at departmental and institutional level

Equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) and anti-racist work have become a major concern for universities following watershed moments that have shone a light on racism, injustice and inequality. However, the depth of EDI and anti-racist initiatives within universities has been questioned. Some universities have been condemned for “tokenistic” inclusion and equality efforts, and it’s important to affirm that EDI and anti-racism should not be positioned as a compliance exercise, but instead should be embedded into the fabric of an institution. In fact, the measures and strategies used to bring about social justice should be pivotal to UK universities’ success and excellence in the same way that the Research Excellence Framework (REF) and Teaching Excellence Framework (TEF) outcomes are.

As an EDI lead for a London university, my role involves the translation of EDI strategy into practical, operational delivery. I coordinate and organise EDI training based on research that I led as well as localised needs. I also promote EDI-related activities at school, work on student interventions and am a Race Equality Charter panellist.

Below, I set out some recommendations for the higher education sector based on my work:

1. Anti-racist work and efforts on EDI must be shared across all within universities. Research has shown that those engaging in this work tend to be minoritised groups. Undertaking this work as a racially minoritised person can be lonely and isolating and can lead to trauma and harm. It is therefore important for this work to be shared. One of the ways this can be achieved is through cultivating a culture of collective responsibility for EDI and anti-racism. Central to this is publicising the impact of initiatives on the experiences of all staff and students, encouraging academic and professional staff to work alongside each other on EDI and anti-racist initiatives as part of routine work and embedding EDI and anti-racism into institutional strategies and policies. These strategies and policies will then be further drawn on and operationalised at localised levels within the institution.

• We need to notice who is missing from the decision-making table – and act
• Diversity statements: the good, the bad and the ugly
• Moving beyond statements of commitment to taking action on race equality

2. Sustainable and widespread institutional change regarding EDI and anti-racism can be achieved only when linked to strategies, policies, key performance indicators (KPIs) and the public reporting of KPIs. Universities should adopt KPIs regarding all staff members’ work towards strategy objectives on EDI and anti-racism as well as the outcomes and impact of these activities and initiatives. Examples could relate to interventions embedded within courses and modules and broader initiatives that are led by staff that feed into EDI policies and strategies. These collective efforts could then be used as case studies to showcase work and build in accountability in publishing impact and outcomes.

This, of course, will require time and effort from staff, so it is incredibly important that time is given to staff to undertake this work so that it is meaningful, sustained and embedded in their professional and academic practice. This approach could also encourage staff to make institutional inputs in a way that is fitting with localised responses to EDI and commitments to anti-racism at institution and departmental levels.

3. Measures and initiatives should be localised and rooted in evidence-based research with staff and students. At the heart of any intervention should be a localised strategy based on the specific needs of the institution and department. A one-size-fits-all approach should not be taken. Insights and analysis should form the basis of the approach taken to identify the appropriate strategy for change.

Examples could relate to understanding the experiences of minoritised students at department level. To gain such knowledge, techniques might include using interviews or focus groups, critically examining and reviewing curricula as a starting point for decolonial work and creating safe spaces for staff to engage in anti-racist work to understand the issues at hand and work together to provide relevant, evidence-based interventions.

4. To increase engagement with EDI and anti-racism training, a culture needs be fostered that sits training front and centre in everything the institution does. This can be nurtured through senior leadership teams’ active endorsement of the activities and interventions that are being rolled out. This approach can be linked to universities’ broader strategies and policies and to sector-specific, evidence-based approaches. If training is made mandatory, then it must be made clear why this is the case, and training should then be linked back to relevant objectives, strategies, policies and KPIs.

5. A joined-up approach must be taken in which those working on EDI are doing so collaboratively with others within the university to share best practice and build “hubs of practice”. In this way, there will be active involvement of students, professional services, academics and senior management teams in efforts of co-creation. Beyond this, there should be a benchmark of practice and training that is institution-wide, and then localised practice and training that is delivered based on the issues raised in points one and three. Institutional benchmarking should be based on the particularities of the university, such as the characteristics of the institution, KPIs relating to EDI and staff and students’ accounts.

6. Universities must not have a “business-as-usual” approach to EDI and anti-racism. EDI is a step in the right direction, but there is a lot of work that needs to be done relating to anti-racism. Sufficient resources must be ring-fenced for EDI and anti-racist initiatives in the same way that resources have been poured into teaching and research within the sector.

Financial resources, including the “buying out” of staff members’ time and paid student support are some ways we can build this future. Staff members should engage in EDI and anti-racist work from a place of strength whereby these efforts are integrated into workload allocation models in the same way that the sector includes administration, research and assessment as part of the workload model for academics.

It is only by positioning EDI and anti-racism as equal to operational functions that the former no longer competes with other functions and thus, facilitates a not-so-business-as-usual approach to social justice.

Yaz Osho is a senior lecturer in entrepreneurship at the University of Westminster Business School. She is also founder of Black, Asian and Minority Ethnic Women Academics (BAMEWA).

If you found this interesting and want advice and insight from academics and university staff delivered direct to your inbox each week, sign up for the THE Campus newsletter.