Utilising our Index provides your organization with the means to thoroughly evaluate and address workplace issues and risks related to racism, bias, and discrimination.

In combination with our expertise, it also offers valuable guidance on the “what”, the “why” and most importantly, the “how”.

This structured framework, designed through the lens of double materiality, empowers both leaders and team members to actively engage in addressing these critical concerns because our approach is based on embedding action across the entire organization, not just in HR & DEI.

In essence, when queried about the measures taken to address these issues, your response can now extend beyond merely detailing hiring practices and pipeline initiatives. Instead, it encompasses a credible plan complemented by a narrative that aligns with and supports your overarching sustainability strategy.

While an internal audit might initially seem like the easier route – maintaining control, perceived cost effectiveness, confidentiality, and familiarity with internal dynamics – our externally led Index offers a range of significant advantages:

• Unlike an internal audit, our external perspective identifies the often overlooked systemic, policy, governance and behavioural elements that impede the progression and inclusion of racialised employees. This is why we are so confident in our Index – because we our evaluating factors that 80% of standard workplace culture and D&I audits often miss.

• Our Index clearly states the scope of our work and the standards followed. This gives your key stakeholders confidence in the integrity of what you prioritise and what you report on.

• Well-intentioned organizations typically take a generalist approach to tackling instances of racism and discrimination, in the mistaken belief that diversity, equity and inclusion and systemic racism mean the same thing. They do not.

• Racial biases need to be addressed through a combination of systems-level adjustments, reinforced by behavioural change and incorporated into governance structures. Your ability to do this is predicated on having the right level of independent support plus the knowledge that we are not constrained by leadership discomfort or the expectation to defer to what’s palatable and convenient to avoid “rocking the boat”.

We generally recommend that organizations, especially those with complex structures encompassing multiple brands, a mix of centralised and decentralised operations, and geographically dispersed workforces, consider utilising the Index.

It's advisable that organizations have a minimum of 500 employees to warrant the investment in the Index and to have sufficient resources for implementing certain remedial actions effectively.

We have also supported smaller organizations because they were led by exceptional, proactive leaders who wanted to go beyond ‘quick wins’ of quotas and targets and were instead committed to driving progress, regardless of mandates or specific incidents.

From start to finish, we advise to allow about 5 months, and this encompasses the planning state right though to report production and playback to your Executive Board.

We have a seven-stage process for conducting assessments:

1. Determining the trigger for engagement

You can engage our services based on various factors, such as low engagement survey ratings from racially diverse employees, a focus on race and ethnicity in workforce planning, recent employee relations concerns, the need to independently validate your progress, support tender responses or a desire to boost credibility with marginalised employees or consumers.

2. Deciding the scope

While our assessment is holistic, you can choose specific domains (up to three) for deeper evaluation.

3. Partnering with our team

Initially, we will work alongside you to support the identification of key stakeholders, define roles, and ensure effective communication within your organization. After that, we take responsibility for all of the logistics coordination.

4. One-to-one stakeholder interviews

We assess risks and focus areas through individual interviews, adapting our approach to your organization's complexity.

We typically speak to leaders with functional responsibility and colleagues are lead or are part of operational execution.

These interviews will last no longer than an hour.

5. Data gathering and analysis

All data is procured through rigorous and clearly documented data collection processes.

We work with the information available to us, some of which we will request from you and some of which comes from publicly accessible data and reports.

6. Sample testing

Depending on your needs, we can conduct "compliance" tests to ensure adherence to relevant laws, such as the Equality Act 2010 for race and ethnicity.

7. Remedial actions

Issues are documented, categorized by severity, and prioritized based on their potential to drive your organization toward becoming anti-racist. This is then compiled into a comprehensive report along with a summary risk register.

All remedial actions go through a high-level sign-off process, whereby the Director of Racial Equity and Managing Director verify the scoring and output of each Index assessment.

During our analysis, these are examples of the type of documents we may request from you (if they are available):

• Annual report

• Investors presentation

• Procurement policies/vendor management procedures

• Sustainability report

• Sustainability performance indicators

• HR strategy/People Plan

• Diversity & Inclusion Plan + Metrics

• Corporate Governance report

• Global Reporting Initiative (GRI) or other reports or voluntary frameworks that include human rights, workforce management and/or diversity and inclusion

• Supply-chain management

• Gender and ethnicity pay gap reporting

• Workforce composition/demographic data

• Recruitment and retention statistics

• Employee relationships trackers/reports

• List of policies and procedures

• Equal Opportunities/Anti-Racism/DEI policies

• Engagement survey results

We will also examine publicly available information via sources such as:

• Social media

• Glassdoor, Indeed or other company ratings websites

• News articles, press releases and media coverage

• Employment tribunal cases (related to discrimination, harassment or racism)

• Government or regulatory reports

This list is customised to the uniqueness of the clients operating structure and industry they are part of.

No it does not.

There is no expectation for you to produce documents you don’t have, purely for the purpose of the assessment.

We typically request that there is at least a project lead, and we have the ability to brief the CEO or an executive sponsor to ensure clarity on process, output, and timelines.

This is not a time-intensive process for clients, as we do most of the heavy lifting.

Yes we can.

We can review drafts of emails and town hall-style presentations and help your CEO/senior leader if they decide to deliver an in-person or virtual address.

No it won’t be.

We have a track record of collaborating with in-house legal counsel, and if you prefer, we can coordinate all data requests through your legal teams and have them review the received information before we validate as part of the assurance process.

The Index is not a tool to prove or disprove the existence of racism, nor is it to be used as a weapon to police behaviour and contrary thoughts and opinions; rather, it serves as a catalyst for solutions that empower collective accountability and responsibility that are driven by alignment to the purpose, values, objectives, and behavioural expectations of your organization.

We focus on anti-Black racism because the historical context and deficiencies in modern-day diversity and inclusion practises have shown a collective inability, despite how well-intentioned, to make a transformative difference for employees who are most impacted by systemic racism.

Understanding the barriers that different minoritised communities face is essential in creating societal and organizational equity. Racism, white supremacy, and patriarchy are problems faced by many communities, and having insight into and acting on the overlapping and interdependent systems of discrimination and disadvantage is key. Yet the attempt to merge the specific discriminatory issues facing each minoritised community through broad labels such as ‘ethnic minority’, BAME or ‘other ethnicity’ minimises the core inequities each community faces.

Where possible, the questions in our Racial Equity Assurance Index align with Sustainable Development Goals (SDG) 8 – Decent Work and Economic Growth, 10 – Reduced Inequalities and 16 - Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions, as well as relevant existing sustainability reporting frameworks related to Human Rights and/or diversity and inclusion.

In addition, the systematic approach of the Index contributes to a business’ Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG) reporting. It helps avoid the risk of ‘impact washing’ by being clearly evidence-based and transparent, responding to recent developments in the regulatory requirements around ESG reporting in the USA and Europe.

One that is alert to where inequalities appear (as they relate to systemic racism) and takes an active role in doing something about it in a way that is tied to making an impact for colleagues who are most affected, as opposed to what looks good and/or what feels the most comfortable.

In addition, an anti-racist organization seeks to use evidence and engagement in an anticipatory manner to prevent racial inequality rather than simply provide redress when racism has manifested itself through negative impact.

This proactive approach is vital. This is an ongoing cycle as opposed to a one-off intervention when something happens.

It involves giving people who are most impacted by systemic racism what they need to achieve their fullest potential within the workplace.

Acknowledges that the playing field is not level and that opportunities are not equally and fairly distributed.

Rejects the notion that we should all be 'colourblind' because to do that means we never have to question the ways in which race is a factor in who gets hired, promoted, performance-managed or fired.

Failure to see and acknowledge racial differences makes it very difficult, if it not impossible, to recognise the unconscious biases that everyone has and how that impacts on the lived experiences of marginalised and minoritised employees.

Whilst the Index is an extremely valuable tool for many organizations, it may not be the right fit in certain circumstances:

Lack of commitment – if you are still debating whether or not to take action, this Index may not be right for you. Successful implementation requires a firm commitment and a willingness to act on the suggested remedial actions.

Persistent discomfort with the topic – discomfort is normal, yet it is essential that leaders are willing and able to push past that, as without it, many will struggle to have candid conservations about the results of the Index and therefore this will undermine your commitments.

Resistance to external evaluation – if you are not open to external scrutiny, feedback and doing differently, the Index is not the right fit for you.

Lack of buy-in from leadership – if your executive colleagues are not on board with proactively tackling racial inequality and disparities, the Index will not be an effective tool for you as leadership buy-in is crucial for driving meaningful and sustainable change.

In these instances, you may benefit from more initial internal discussions, basic anti-racism and unconscious bias training or other preparatory steps before undertaking the Index.

The journey ahead is a process, and different organizations will be at different stages, dependent on their values, strategic objectives, and collective perspectives on sustainability and ambitions to be an employer of choice.