Since our last equity, diversity, and inclusion (EDI) update eight months ago, we have witnessed positive developments across the School. Passionate and dedicated faculty members integrated EDI-focused curriculum and discussions in the classroom. Tireless staff members incorporated EDI actions into their administrative duties. And students, faculty, staff, and partners together created new EDI programming and tools for the Ivey community.
In May, we released our first Community Diversity Survey, and have since created 11 recommendations to support Ivey’s progress in increasing our community members’ sense of belonging, inclusion, and equity.
- Support Ivey community participation in Western’s demographic census
- Adoption of core hours and flexible work
- Include socio-economic considerations in all student program planning
- Develop a financial aid and literacy program for students
- Include positionality (social and personal identity) considerations in community event and program planning
- Develop a food security program for students
- Increased staff professional development and career progression pathways
- Proactive and active accommodation models for disability
- Integrate culture work from the strategy process with EDI actions
- Incorporate use of gender-neutral pronouns in Ivey communications and website
- Create a set of equity and inclusion training programs for faculty, staff, and students
Working with the EDI Advisory Council, we have established a measurement plan with diversity targets and KPIs to monitor and report. This document also includes measurement principles designed to guide our EDI actions.
Ivey's Principles of Measurement
Ivey has committed to measuring its EDI Action Plan through progress and impact measures, guided by certain principles. This document lays out a proposal for an evidence-informed approach for the design and implementation of EDI actions and interventions that will be monitored over time by the Ivey Business School. Each section of this document is contextualized by guiding principles to ensure our approach to measurement and understanding of EDI impact is aligned with the following overarching principles:
RESPONSIBLE[i]: Recognizing that as our community changes over time, so too will our measurement approach. Responsible measurement means we must endeavour to design tools and utilize approaches reflective of our community’s needs, which are dynamic. Responsible measurement also takes seriously the idea that if we measure everything, nothing we measure is relevant. Practicing responsible measurement requires restraint and intentionality in how we design and think about what we measure, and how frequently we engage in measurement cycles.
RECIPROCAL: When we practice reciprocity through measurement, we are accountable to only measure what we are prepared to act on, as an institution and as a community. Reciprocity through measurement, over time, aims to build a foundation of trust with community members because they recognize data shared will be utilized to make sustainable change within our systems, policies, and practices.
RESPECTFUL: Understanding that no one source of data has the capacity to uncover a person’s lived experience, we will endeavour to use mixed methods, combining both qualitative and quantitative approaches to data-collection, to better understand, listen, and act on the stories our community members share. Understanding that data can exist in multiple forms and emerge from many different collection methods allows us to respect and bear witness to the complexity of the lived experiences that create our dynamic community.
RELEVANT: Practicing relevance through measurement requires we ensure community needs are met through both how we evaluate data and how we report findings and recommendations. Relevance through measurement must also extend to how we think about and create final reports: final reports must be accessible to diverse community members. Therefore, the process of creating these final reports should include community participation. Practicing relevance through measurement also requires final reports and recommendations be clearly connected to the initial rationale for measurement-collection. This way, our community witnesses that stories and data shared are being acted upon through recommendations and implementation-planning.
REFUSAL: Whenever we engage in measurement, both qualitative and quantitative, we must leave space in our relationships for refusal. Not all parts or aspects of a person’s lived experience can be shared, nor should we expect will be shared. We must create spaces in our measurement approaches that both accept and support refusal of participation.
[i] The 5 Rs here are drawn from the work of Indigenous scholars Kirkness & Barnhardt, 2001, https://www.afn.ca/uploads/files/education2/the4rs.pdf and the recent work of Deborah McGregor, Jean-Paul Restoule, and Rochelle Johnston, 2018, https://www.canadianscholars.ca/books/indigenous-research