The Power of Media initiative is a collaboration between the Platform on Shaping the Future of Media, Entertainment and Sport and the Centre for the New Economy and Society, which are committed to building prosperous, inclusive and equitable economies and societies that create opportunities for all and help to advance voices of underrepresented groups in media content.
Produced in collaboration with Accenture, the Reflecting Society: The State of Diverse Representation in Media and Entertainment report assesses the state of diversity across content and creative production in five key sectors: gaming, TV and film, news and publishing, advertising, and sport and sport media.
It draws on research, interviews and insights from heads of content, diversity, equity and inclusion leaders, institutes and organizations. While each media sector may face different contexts and challenges, the report highlights a path forward for the media, entertainment and sports industry. In the months ahead, the Power of Media Initiative will continue to tackle the challenge of diversity and representation in media, entertainment and sports, with the aim of leveraging the Forum's global network of leaders to mobilize progress.
Read the full report here. View Forum photos. From a gender standpoint, there was evidence that ethnically diverse households are more likely to watch shows starring women. On the other hand, findings were less conclusive surrounding whether men or women were more likely to watch diverse shows, with each gender correlating by less than 0.
That program featured women in three of the four leading roles, and one out of those people was Black. Its top cast members were all white, and three of the four were men. In order to reach key diverse audiences, studios must embrace diversity and bear in mind that viewers are more likely to watch shows where they see themselves represented. While this has long made sense from a logical and moral standpoint, we now have the data to prove it.
About Us. As for studies citing the positive impact of racial diversity on corporate financial performance, they do not stand up to scrutiny either. Indeed, we know of no evidence to suggest that replacing, say, two or three white male directors with people from underrepresented groups is likely to enhance the profits of a Fortune company.
They have found that it leads to higher-quality work, better decision-making, greater team satisfaction, and more equality—under certain circumstances. Moreover, advocates who justify diversity initiatives on the basis of financial benefits may be shooting themselves in the foot.
Research suggests that when company diversity statements emphasize the economic payoffs, people from underrepresented groups start questioning whether the organization is a place where they really belong, which reduces their interest in joining it. In addition, when diversity initiatives promise financial gains but fail to deliver, people are likely to withdraw their support for them.
Still another flaw in the familiar business case for diversity is the notion that a diverse team will have richer discussions and a better decision-making process simply because it is diverse.
Under the right organizational conditions, though, employees can turn cultural differences into assets for achieving team goals. Studies have shown, for example, that diverse teams realize performance benefits in certain circumstances: when team members are able to reflect on and discuss team functioning; when status differences among ethnic groups are minimized; when people from both high- and low-status identity groups believe the team supports learning; and—as we reported in our earlier article—when teams orient members to learn from their differences rather than marginalize or deny them.
But absent conditions that foster inquiry, egalitarianism, and learning, diversity either is unrelated to or undermines team effectiveness. When diversity initiatives promise financial gains but fail to deliver, people are likely to withdraw their support for them. Being genuinely valued and respected involves more than just feeling included. To make real progress, people—and the organizational cultures they inhabit—must change. We previously identified four actions that were helping business leaders and managers shift to a learning-and-effectiveness approach.
The first task for those in charge is to build trust by creating a workplace where people feel safe expressing themselves freely.
At no time has this need been greater in the United States than during the current unrest spurred by outrage over police brutality against Black men and women—a legacy of centuries of racism. Two weeks into the nationwide protests that began in May, white leaders in companies across the country struggled with how to respond. Publicly expressing support for the Black Lives Matter movement was one thing; knowing what to say to Black employees, who might already have been feeling marginalized or undervalued at work, was quite another.
Leaders who were used to wielding authority grounded in their subject-matter expertise had no comparable expertise to handle the deep grief, rage, and despair felt by many of their employees—especially their Black employees. And Black leaders, many with firsthand experience of police mistreatment and other forms of racial oppression, faced the challenge of managing their own strong emotions and speaking their truth without appearing biased against whites.
Yet troubling times provide opportunities for leaders to begin conversations that foster learning. In response to public acts of racial injustice, for example, white leaders can reach out from a place of vulnerability, as a way of creating connection and psychological safety, rather than staying silent from a place of privilege and self-protection.
This was the choice made by a white senior partner in a global professional services firm when he decided to convene a special virtual meeting with his teams across the country. He knew that if he said nothing about the recent racist incidents, his silence would speak for him, with a message not of neutrality but of complicity. What he astutely realized, though, was that people needed him simply to begin a dialogue, acknowledge his pain and theirs, and give them the space to talk about their experiences inside and outside the firm, if they wished.
He had no solutions, but that moment required none—just a willingness to speak from the heart and listen compassionately to whatever his colleagues might share. Perhaps most important, he was willing to risk not getting his own words or actions exactly right, and he was ready to receive feedback with openness and equanimity. This action calls for both individual and collective learning aimed at producing systemic change. Diversity and inclusion are two interconnected concepts—but they are far from interchangeable.
Diversity is about representation or the make-up of an entity. Inclusion is about how well the contributions, presence and perspectives of different groups of people are valued and integrated into an environment. An environment where many different genders, races, nationalities, and sexual orientations and identities are present but only the perspectives of certain groups are valued or carry any authority or influence, may be diverse, but it is not inclusive.
A diverse and inclusive workplace is one that makes everyone, regardless of who they are or what they do for the business, feel equally involved in and supported in all areas of the workplace.
Do you have diversity in your recruiting , in each of your departments, and in your leadership? Do you have good representation of employees of color overall, but all of them are in the same department?
0コメント