5 ways to use your Employee Resource Groups to support your EDI strategy
Lots of organisations created Employee Resource Groups (ERGs) in the form of working groups, steering groups and committees at the start of their EDI journey. These groups are around 3-5 years old now, and we are often approached by clients wanting to know how best to use them after the first throws of their EDI commitment. So, here are some of the suggestions we offer clients
1) Make sure you know what your group is for.
There are lots of titles for employee resource groups: antiracism working group, inclusion working group, EDI committee, EDI steering group, access working group, the list goes on. Generally, there are three main types of groups:
Affinity groups, which are designed to be safe spaces for people with similar identities to empower and uplift each other. There may be a level of catharsis, but this group probably won’t have much to do with policy or strategy. Occasionally, leaders of the organisation may ask members of the affinity group for advice or their opinion on something, but the main focus of this group will be social, support and safety.
Working groups tend to be a group of people with a set of valuable experiences who come together to work on a specific project. The project may be related to an organisation's overall goals, but the coming together is precise and members are chosen according to their ability to inform the project. Because it is project based, the group is likely to have a tenure and therefore the group ends when the project is over.
Steering groups again are normally comprised of people with expertise or experience of the thing they are steering. Their role is to advise, guide and sometimes oversee. If their remit is to oversee, they will be supporting the organisation to deliver on goals, action plans and strategies, not just advising. This group may have a specific time period, but may not.
Therefore, it is important you can answer the following to help you decide what type of ERG you want:
Does this group advise us?
Do we need this group for the long term?
Do we want them to support us by delivering parts of this work?
Is this just a supportive measure for our colleagues where we recognise they may be a minority and we want them to have psychologically safe spaces?
2) Establish the groups remit
Too often, organisations and group members have no clue of its remit or have lost sense of what the group is supposed to be doing. This can lead to frustration and resentment if, for example, the group is trying to advise and deliver, but the organisation believes it is an affinity group. Equally, if an affinity group is being asked to advise on policy, members can begin to feel exploited.
Establishing the purpose, remit and boundaries of the group is therefore essential. This can be realised easily with terms of reference which should be explicit about:
The length of service
What the group advises on and what it doesn’t
Whether it is expected to deliver any aspects of work
Which policies, action plans and strategies guide it
What it doesn’t do
Ideally, in the spirit of inclusion, the terms of reference would be created collaboratively, guided by the organisation but informed significantly by the membership of the group.
3) Two-way communication
One of the big frustrations that ERG members have is that leaders stop communicating with them on what progress they are making against the EDI goals or objectives they have. This can look like an initial period of excellent communication between the group and leadership with actions being completed. As the commitments get harder, leaders can become more hesitant to communicate with the ERG for fear of criticism, or fear of revealing that they don’t know enough about the topic to move it forward. Here, communication becomes one way with the ERG communicating to leadership, sometimes with critique, but receiving no response or engagement from leadership.
Therefore, it is important at the outset for leaders to be clear on their responsibility to share information with the ERG. The point below will help this. In addition, it is also helpful for leaders to lean into some vulnerability and be willing to be open about things they don’t know about, or are not confident in. If they know they lack knowledge and understanding of EDI topics, a steering group might be more helpful but leaders would need to commit to personal work to develop their own knowledge of EDI topics in an ongoing way, or this can indicate a lack of commitment to EDI and lack of self-awareness of their personal contribution to inclusion or exclusionary behaviours.
4) Consider having a member of Senior Leadership Team (SLT) or Board member in the ERG
This needs to be considered very carefully and is probably only appropriate for steering or working groups. Having no one at a senior level in an ERG can communicate a lack of interest in EDI work. However, if the wrong member of SLT or the Board sit on an ERG, it can create a psychologically unsafe environment where members don’t feel able to openly communicate their opinions and suggestions which will undermine the whole point of an effective ERG.
The benefits of having senior leadership or governance as part of the ERG structure is that there is direct communication between grassroots and lived experience of the organisation and strategic leadership and governance. This makes it easier for the Board to be part of the EDI discussion and support the organisation to deliver on its EDI aims. It also demonstrates a meaningful commitment to EDI work to the wider organisation and can communicate the understanding that it is important for the longevity of the organisation.
However, we strongly recommend that SLT and Board members are only part of an ERG when:
They are aware of their impact on psychological safety and are aware of strategies to mitigate these. This applies to SLT and Board members with identities which experience exclusion themselves, due to the power of their role in the organisation.
They have sufficient training or learning to support them to understand how to hear without gaslighting or dismissing concerns that are raised.
The rest of the Board have sufficient understanding of their role in driving and delivering on EDI strategy.
5) Supporting them effectively
It is important to remember that any of these ERGs will need sufficient support and it will vary depending on the group.
An affinity group will need a literal safe space; a space to gather where they aren’t overheard. There is value for an organisation to have an affinity group if you have agreed with them that they will share what sense of inclusion people have and also feedback to you on EDI topics. This is data and it will be important for you to realise that in collecting it, the group has delivered some work for you, and therefore it needs to be recognised in the shape of a ‘thank you’, time, recognition or other supportive measures below.
Working groups and steering groups are giving you more organisational and strategic work. It is vital that you realise that in addition, a person with an identity which experiences exclusion or discrimination is also having to mine their lived experience - and possibly trauma - for the benefit of the organisation. This is additional work that other employees are not doing and should be recognised as such. This recognition can be in the shape of:
Remuneration, especially for casual or freelance members (remember this is a leadership role)
Time from their ‘day job’ to do the research and delivering of EDI work properly
Development - recognising their contribution through CPD
Emotional and wellbeing support recognising the additional emotional labour for people with identities which experience discrimination
Supervision and ERG leadership support
These 5 tips are just the tip of the iceberg in terms of support and advice we give our clients on how to best support and harness their ERGs. If you would like to know more then please contact us today and we would be delighted to have an initial conversation on how Spotlight Inclusion can help.