Imagine yourself on the interview board for an internal audit manager. The next candidate’s CV looks good: some interesting experience, the right formal qualifications, all very promising.
The candidate comes through the doorway, and he’s got a spider-web tattoo covering half of his face.
What’s the first thing that springs into your mind? I’m betting it’s something along the lines of “No ******* way!”
Yet that tattoo has no effect on the candidate’s ability to do the job – and as it’s an internal role there’s no danger that sensitive clients will be put off. But your organisation might end up rejecting this promising candidate because you, and your fellow interviewers, couldn’t get past the tattoo on his face.
You might well think how much better it would have been if his tattoo had been out of sight on his arm, covered up by his smart business suit. It wouldn’t have been an issue, you and the rest of the panel wouldn’t have recoiled, and the interview could have proceeded amiably.
Speak with diversity and inclusion professionals and the concept of ‘covering’ comes up repeatedly. This is when employees feel they have to hide or de-emphasise aspects of their character, or alter their natural behaviour, in order to fit in with the organisation. If they don’t, they fear they will be judged unfairly or discriminated against.
You might assume covering is the employee’s problem, not the organisation’s. But evidence suggests that covering by employees reduces their business performance and their commitment to the organisation.
Deloitte University wrote a white paper on covering that is well known among diversity and inclusion practitioners, but is also pretty sobering reading for all business leaders and talent managers.
Deloitte surveyed more than 3,000 employees in a range of organisations across seven industries; 93% of respondents said their employers claimed inclusion as one of their corporate values.
Despite this, covering was widespread; 83% of gay employees felt they needed to cover, 79% of blacks, and 66% of women. One particularly startling figure was that 45% of straight white men felt the need to cover, hiding or de-emphasising their politics, religion, socio-economic background, physical or mental health, age, disability, teetotalism… You name it, they cover it up.
And both employees and their employing organisations suffered as a result:
- For differing types of covering, between 60% and 73% of employees felt covering was detrimental to their sense of self.
- 53% of employees said their leaders expected covering to take place; more than half felt this limited their opportunities within the organisation, and half acknowledged their commitment to the organisation was diminished as a result.
- 48% of employees stated that their organisational culture expected covering, and more than a quarter of respondents felt their opportunities and commitment were reduced as a result.
The result of covering is employee unhappiness and demoralisation, energy wasted on dissembling and artificially altering behaviour, and reduced productivity and commitment. And that is, without a doubt, bad for business.
So, what can you do about it? Clearly, just writing up diversity and inclusion policies doesn’t cut it; your people have to know that they can bring their true selves to work, and that means telling them you celebrate all employees’ brilliant diversity – constantly.
Above all, lead by example. Instead of strutting around like demigods, business leaders need to uncover themselves, revealing their humanity with all its messy diversity. As one Deloitte respondent put it, “leaders have to uncover first. If they don’t, we won’t.”