report 14_diversity_email
TRANSCRIPT
1
Report 014Diversity
Life Working Series 2015
2
1. IntroductionDeveloping our understanding of diversity in the City
Despite some progress being made over the last few years, Diversity remains at the top of the agenda for many City firms. This year’s report looks at the importance of diversity to a business, as well as the effects of a more varied workforce.
The research for this report was undertaken by online survey between 15th August and 23rd September 2014. Requests to participate in the survey were sent to more than 27,238 current and former candidates and clients of Astbury Marsden. A total of 1,046 responses were received and analysed.
The information and data contained in this report are for information purposes only and are not intended, nor implied to
be a substitute for professional advice. In no event will Astbury Marsden be liable to you or any third party for any decision made or action taken in reliance of the results obtained through the use of the information and/or data contained or provided herein.
Please consider that the answers given are based on the respondents interpretation of the question and the response options.
If you have questions regarding the survey, or the report please contact:
Adam Jackson+44 (0)20 7065 [email protected]
3
2 . Summary of FindingsWhat employees really perceive to be employers’ and line managers’ commitment to diversity.
Diversity is consistently placed at the top of the boardroom agenda, but what is the opinion of City employees? Do they believe diversity is as important as their employer does?
The short answer, is yes.
According to our research, over half of respondents believe that diversity is important, with less than one third (30%) being indifferent. This enforces the view that a diverse workforce is an essential consideration, not only for businesses, but also for their employees.
But why is it seen as important? How does a diverse workplace really affect the working environment?
The average rating was 3.50
4
According to our research, city staff believe that a diverse workforce will make their company more attractive as an employer and will improve employee motivation. Interestingly, however they think it has no effect on corporate productivity.
Despite these findings, this year, we have seen a drop in employee’s perception of both their employers and their line manager’s commitment to tackling diversity. Both employers and line managers are still seen to be the most committed to the issues of race and gender. Disability and age are still further down the priority list.
Other findings in the last 12 months include:
• Employees earning over £160,000 place the most importance on a diverse workforce.
• Those aged over 60 believe that the diversity agenda is not important.
• Non Financial Services employees consider their Employer and their line manager to be more committed to diversity than financial services and management consulting employees.
• Compliance teams have the most positive impression of employers and line managers commitment to diversity. Operations & Middle Office and Administration staff sit at the other end of the scale.
• Sales staff see the biggest gap between the firm’s commitment to diversity and that of line managers.
• There is little difference between the sexes perception of their manager’s commitment to the issue of diversity, however, men believe their employer is more committed than women.
• In line with the last two years, the 60+ age group, is the only group not to consider gender diversity in the top two priorities for employers and managers.
• The biggest gaps between line manager and employer perception were within the 20 - 29 age group.
• Staff earning £80,000 - £100,000 salaries consider their employers to be the most committed to diversity, those earning £140,000 - £160,000 believe they are the least committed.
• Staff earning £160,000 plus showed the highest levels of manager commitment.
There is no doubt that diversity remains a priority for clients and candidates. However, respondents do not appear to be able to confidently identify the tangible business benefits of a successful diversity policy.
5
3 . Importance of DiversityHow important do City staff really think diversity is?
All tables in this section are graded along a scale of 1 to 5. With 1 signifying ‘Not Important’ and 5 signifying ‘Very Important
FunctionFig 3.2
HR employees most strongly believe in the importance of variety in the workplace. Strategy and Change staff also have a positive opinion.
Sales and Distribution sits at the other end of the scale with an indifferent view of the importance of diversity.
SectorFig 3.1
When looking on a sector level basis, we can see that Management Consulting employees see diversity as marginally more important than other sectors. There is little difference between the opinions of financial services and non financial services employees.
Sector Average
Financial Services 3.47
Non Financial Services 3.43
Management Consulting 3.64
AVERAGE 3.50
Function Average
Administration 3.33
Compliance 3.33
Finance 3.28
HR 3.94
Internal Audit 3.25
Operations & Middle Office 3.73
Revenue Generator 3.52
Risk & Governance 3.45
Sales & Distribution 3.00
Strategy & Change 3.83
Technology 3.38
Other 3.80
AVERAGE 3.50
6
Job levelFig 3.3
GenderFig 3.4
AgeFig 3.5
Women believe diversity is more important in the workplace than men do.
This could be due to there being fewer women in the city than men and therefore a greater focus for them on the importance of diversity.
Respondents aged over 60 years old place the least importance on diversity. The age group 40 - 49 years places the most importance.
When looking on a job level basis, AVP staff most strongly believe in the importance of diversity. Just one level above, Managers have the lowest opinion.
Job Level Average
Analyst/Executive 3.60
Associate/Manager 3.39
Associate Vice President 3.69
Manager 3.33
Vice President/Senior Manager 3.56
Director/Executive Director 3.60
Managing Director/Partner 3.46
Other 3.31
AVERAGE 3.50
Gender Average % of respondents
Female 3.77 28.6%
Male 3.40 71.4%
AVERAGE 3.50 100%
Age Average
20 - 29 3.61
30 - 39 3.46
40 - 49 3.65
50 - 59 3.38
60+ 2.40
AVERAGE 3.50
7
SalaryFig 3.7
People earning the highest salaries (£160,000 plus) place the most importance on maintaining a diverse workplace. Those earning £120,000 - £140,000 and those at the lowest salary bracket; less than £40,000 believe diversity to be of the least importance.
RaceFig 3.8
Those of Bangladeshi origin, place the most importance on diversity, shortly followed by Asian other (non Chinese), Black Caribbean and Black (other). These are all ethnic minorities in the City, and therefore could be seen to value a more diverse employer. Those of Mixed Race and of White British origin place the lowest importance.
Ethnic group Average % of respondents
White British 3.37 43.9%
White Irish 3.35 4.2%
White (other) 3.46 20.9%
Mixed Race 3.22 2.3%
Black African 3.46 2.7%
Black Caribbean 4.00 0.4%
Black (other) 4.00 0.6%
Indian 3.84 12.1%
Pakistani 3.67 0.6%
Bangladeshi 4.50 0.6%
Chinese 3.68 5.0%
Asian other (Non Chinese) 4.10 2.3%
Other 4.10 2.5%
AVERAGE 3.50 1.7%
Salary Average
Less than £40,000 3.75
£40 - 60,000 3.54
£60 - 80,000 3.33
£80 - £100,000 3.62
£100 - £120,000 3.29
£120 - 140,000 3.24
£140 - 160,000 3.76
£160,000 plus 4.00
AVERAGE 3.50
8
4 . Commitment to DiversityLooking at employee perceptions of commitment to the diversity agenda.
SectorFig 4.1
Commitment of Employer
Financial services employees believe their firms to be less committed to diversity programs than non-financial services staff. On average, Management Consulting employers are marginally less committed. When comparing to last year’s report, we can see that non financial services firms have seen the biggest improvement in their commitment to disability diversity whereas Financial Services has seen the biggest drop in commitment to the same area.
Barrier Financial ServicesNon Financial
ServicesManagement Consulting
AVERAGE
Race 3.78 3.80 3.88 3.80
Gender 3.76 3.64 3.84 3.76
Sexual Orientation 3.63 3.62 3.56 3.62
Disability 3.43 3.71 3.40 3.46
Religion 3.59 3.56 3.48 3.56
Age 3.46 3.62 3.08 3.41
AVERAGE 3.61 3.66 3.54 3.60
All tables in this section are graded along a scale of 1 to 5. With 1 signifying ‘Not Committed’ and 5 signifying ‘Very committed’
9
Commitment of Line Manager
Managers in non financial services firms were considered to be more committed to diversity than their non financial services and management consulting counterparts. Compared to last year, financial services has seen a drop across all barriers, whereas non financial services has seen an increase. The lowest commitment was found within management consulting for age and disability.
Barrier Financial Services Non Financial Services Management Consulting AVERAGE
Race 3.62 3.73 3.69 3.64
Gender 3.63 3.67 3.79 3.66
Sexual Orientation 3.48 3.58 3.49 3.49
Disability 3.48 3.60 3.32 3.46
Religion 3.59 3.58 3.42 3.56
Age 3.55 3.67 3.30 3.52
AVERAGE 3.56 3.64 3.50 3.56
FunctionFig 4.2 Commitment of Employer
Barrier
Ad
min
istr
atio
n
Co
mp
lianc
e
Fina
nce
HR
Inte
rnal
Aud
it
Op
erat
ions
&
Mid
dle
Off
ice
Rev
enue
Gen
erat
or
Ris
k &
G
ove
rnan
ce
Sal
es &
D
istr
ibut
ion
Str
ateg
y &
C
han
ge
Tech
nolo
gy
Oth
er
AV
ER
AG
E
Race 3.67 4.07 3.85 3.90 3.67 3.61 3.57 3.82 3.72 3.83 3.90 3.67 3.80
Gender 3.50 4.00 3.80 4.20 3.92 3.42 3.57 3.65 3.67 3.67 3.91 3.75 3.76
Sexual Orientation
3.38 3.79 3.71 3.80 3.73 3.39 3.13 3.60 3.28 3.55 3.82 3.64 3.62
Disability 3.13 3.71 3.54 3.85 3.67 2.97 3.13 3.35 3.17 3.26 3.72 3.56 3.46
Religion 3.13 3.93 3.61 3.55 3.17 3.37 3.50 3.60 3.22 3.45 3.81 3.42 3.56
Age 3.22 4.00 3.39 3.40 3.42 2.97 3.13 3.65 3.17 3.21 3.57 3.47 3.41
AVERAGE 3.34 3.92 3.65 3.78 3.60 3.29 3.34 3.61 3.37 3.50 3.79 3.58 3.60
Compliance teams have the most positive opinion of their employer’s dedication to diversity. Operations and middle office staff have the most negative opinion, most specifically within disability and age. When looking at last year, all functions have a more negative opinion of employer’s commitment to diversity except for Compliance and Revenue Generator staff.
10
Commitment of Line Manager
Barrier
Ad
min
istr
atio
n
Co
mp
lianc
e
Fina
nce
HR
Inte
rnal
Aud
it
Op
erat
ions
&
Mid
dle
Off
ice
Rev
enue
G
ener
ato
r
Ris
k &
G
ove
rnan
ce
Sal
es &
D
istr
ibut
ion
Str
ateg
y&
Ch
ang
e
Tech
nolo
gy
Oth
er
AV
ER
AG
E
Race 2.88 4.20 3.71 4.00 3.75 3.32 3.48 3.67 3.50 3.71 3.69 3.50 3.64
Gender 3.00 4.13 3.66 4.25 3.75 3.18 3.52 3.70 3.39 3.76 3.74 3.58 3.66
Sexual Orientation
2.88 3.86 3.61 3.90 3.58 3.08 3.17 3.44 3.17 3.50 3.60 3.61 3.49
Disability 2.88 3.93 3.57 3.95 3.75 3.11 3.17 3.46 3.00 3.26 3.58 3.58 3.46
Religion 2.88 4.20 3.57 3.95 3.50 3.18 3.39 3.62 3.28 3.57 3.68 3.42 3.56
Age 3.11 4.07 3.55 3.95 3.67 3.08 3.05 3.63 3.22 3.45 3.64 3.47 3.52
AVERAGE 2.94 4.07 3.61 4.00 3.67 3.16 3.30 3.59 3.26 3.54 3.66 3.53 3.56
Compliance and HR teams see their line managers as the most devoted to diversity. Administration and Operations & Middle Office sit at the other end of the scale.
When looking at last year, the biggest drop was for Administration staff who believe their line manages are no longer committed to Race. A drop of 1.55 from 4.43 last year. The largest negative shift in sentiment is in Sales & Distribution where the commitment of line managers to diversity is perceived to be less than the commitment of the firms they work for.
All tables in this section are graded along a scale of 1 to 5. With 1 signifying ‘Not Committed’ and 5 signifying ‘Very committed’
11
Job levelFig 4.3
Managing Director/Partner level staff believe the most strongly that their employer is committed to diversity, in particular; race. Those at Associate/Manager level believe their manager is the least committed to age diversity. Almost all levels had a drop in the level of commitment by an employer this year, however, Managing Directors saw increases across all barriers, with a 0.41 increase in commitment to religion this year.
Commitment of Employer
Barrier Analyst/ Executive
Associate/ Manager
Associate Vice
PresidentManager
VP/Senior
Manager
Director/Executive Director
Managing Director/Partner
Other AVERAGE
Race 3.77 3.57 3.74 3.68 3.96 3.84 4.00 3.91 3.80
Gender 3.79 3.57 3.84 3.78 3.85 3.69 3.86 3.69 3.76
Sexual Orientation
3.70 3.39 3.77 3.47 3.77 3.57 3.71 3.59 3.62
Disability 3.46 3.37 3.48 3.37 3.61 3.35 3.64 3.41 3.46
Religion 3.59 3.35 3.68 3.53 3.63 3.53 3.86 3.55 3.56
Age 3.62 3.06 3.55 3.47 3.34 3.35 3.36 3.50 3.41
AVERAGE 3.65 3.38 3.68 3.55 3.69 3.56 3.74 3.61 3.60
Commitment of Line Manager
Barrier Analyst/ Executive
Associate/ Manager
Associate Vice
PresidentManager
VP/Senior
Manager
Director/Executive Director
Managing Director/Partner
Other AVERAGE
Race 3.59 3.57 3.77 3.57 3.76 3.51 3.93 3.66 3.64
Gender 3.56 3.53 3.74 3.65 3.88 3.43 4.14 3.55 3.66
Sexual Orientation
3.51 3.22 3.68 3.35 3.66 3.37 3.79 3.59 3.49
Disability 3.48 3.39 3.52 3.36 3.59 3.31 3.64 3.53 3.46
Religion 3.63 3.40 3.77 3.47 3.61 3.41 3.86 3.59 3.56
Age 3.61 3.33 3.71 3.51 3.60 3.26 3.54 3.56 3.52
AVERAGE 3.56 3.41 3.70 3.48 3.68 3.38 3.82 3.58 3.56
Similarly to employers, Managing Director/Partner level staff perceive their line managers to have the highest commitment to diversity. The lowest perception lies one level below at Director/Executive Director level. The greatest perception gap between the employer and line manager is perceived by Director/Executive Director level staff.
12
GenderFig 4.4
Males believe their employer to be more committed to the diversity agenda than their female counterparts. The sexes’ perceptions are most closely aligned in respect of age and diverge the most widely on gender. This could be due to the continued debate for gender equality.
Barrier Female Male AVERAGE
Race 3.62 3.86 3.79
Gender 3.45 3.88 3.76
Sexual Orientation 3.42 3.69 3.62
Disability 3.28 3.52 3.45
Religion 3.36 3.64 3.56
Age 3.39 3.42 3.41
AVERAGE 3.42 3.67 3.60
Commitment of Employer
Barrier Female Male AVERAGE
Race 3.64 3.64 3.64
Gender 3.64 3.66 3.66
Sexual Orientation 3.51 3.48 3.49
Disability 3.47 3.46 3.46
Religion 3.53 3.57 3.56
Age 3.59 3.48 3.51
AVERAGE 3.56 3.55 3.55
Commitment of Line Manager
Women believe that their manager is more committed to all aspects of diversity, than their employer is. However, men believe the opposite.
When looking at last year’s results, we can see that line manager’s commitment to diversity has decreased across all areas for both sexes.
All tables in this section are graded along a scale of 1 to 5. With 1 signifying ‘Not Committed’ and 5 signifying ‘Very committed’
13
AgeFig 4.5
The age group that shows the highest level of belief in employer’s commitment to diversity is 40 - 49. The biggest changes over the year were seen in the 60 plus age group. This group saw a shift from the most committed to sexual orientation in 2014, to the least committed this year. Disability and age were the only areas that this age group felt their employer were more committed to this year.
For the third year running, the 60+ age group are still the only group not to consider gender diversity in the top two priorities for employers.
Commitment of Employer
Commitment of Line Manager
Barrier 20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+ AVERAGE
Race 3.77 3.73 3.81 4.02 3.60 3.80
Gender 3.82 3.69 3.85 3.76 3.40 3.76
Sexual Orientation 3.57 3.60 3.71 3.62 3.20 3.62
Disability 3.52 3.40 3.50 3.44 3.70 3.46
Religion 3.46 3.50 3.65 3.65 3.60 3.56
Age 3.34 3.36 3.50 3.39 3.70 3.41
AVERAGE 3.58 3.54 3.67 3.65 3.53 3.60
Barrier 20 - 29 30 - 39 40 - 49 50 - 59 60+ AVERAGE
Race 3.73 3.65 3.62 3.59 3.70 3.64
Gender 3.80 3.68 3.61 3.62 3.40 3.66
Sexual Orientation 3.45 3.52 3.55 3.39 3.00 3.49
Disability 3.51 3.52 3.40 3.36 3.80 3.46
Religion 3.69 3.56 3.52 3.47 3.80 3.56
Age 3.55 3.57 3.48 3.35 3.90 3.51
AVERAGE 3.62 3.58 3.53 3.46 3.60 3.55
In contrast, 20-29 year olds saw their line managers as more committed to diversity than any other age group. The 50 - 59 age group displayed the lowest levels of line manager commitment.
The biggest gaps between line manager and employer perceptions were within the 50-59 age group.
14
SalaryFig 4.6
Staff earning £80,000 - £100,000 consider their employers to be the most committed to diversity, particularly race. Employees earning £140,000 - £160,000 believed their employers to be the least committed to diversity.
Commitment of Employer
Commitment of Line Manager
Barrier Less than £40,000
£40 - 60,000 £60 - 80,000 £80 - 100,000£100 -
120,000£120 -
140,000£140 -
160,000£160,000
plusAVERAGE
Race 3.60 3.68 3.80 4.06 3.81 3.58 3.50 4.24 3.80
Gender 3.71 3.66 3.80 3.94 3.76 3.52 3.50 3.95 3.76
Sexual Orientation
3.61 3.48 3.67 3.89 3.64 3.35 3.28 3.67 3.62
Disability 3.41 3.37 3.43 3.69 3.53 3.31 2.89 3.62 3.46
Religion 3.28 3.56 3.58 3.84 3.47 3.54 3.44 3.67 3.56
Age 3.52 3.32 3.41 3.68 3.24 3.27 3.44 3.48 3.41
AVERAGE 3.52 3.51 3.62 3.85 3.58 3.43 3.34 3.77 3.60
Barrier Less than £40,000
£40 - 60,000 £60 - 80,000 £80 - 100,000£100 -
120,000£120 -
140,000£140 -
160,000£160,000
plusAVERAGE
Race 3.50 3.46 3.81 3.82 3.51 3.54 3.61 4.00 3.64
Gender 3.57 3.47 3.73 3.86 3.61 3.46 3.67 4.05 3.66
Sexual Orientation
3.41 3.33 3.60 3.73 3.44 3.38 3.11 3.62 3.49
Disability 3.45 3.32 3.56 3.68 3.37 3.54 2.89 3.67 3.46
Religion 3.43 3.51 3.71 3.71 3.36 3.65 3.33 3.67 3.56
Age 3.57 3.38 3.59 3.75 3.27 3.42 3.72 3.68 3.52
AVERAGE 3.49 3.41 3.67 3.76 3.43 3.50 3.39 3.78 3.56
Staff earning £140,000 - £160,000 showed the lowest levels of manager commitment. Those earning the highest amounts (£160,000+) have the highest perception of line manager’s commitment to diversity.
The biggest gap between employer and line managers’ commitment is for race. Those earning £100,000 - £120,000 believe their employer is more committed to the issue of race, than their line managers.
15
5 . The impact of diversitySo, if a more diverse workforce is implemented, what will be the effect on a business?
When looking at the effects of a more diverse workplace, a majority of respondents in three categories (staff retention, employee motivation and corporate productivity) feel having a diverse workforce will have no effect. With regards to corporate productivity, over 50% of respondents fell that having a diverse workforce will have either no effect or a negative effect.
Having said this, nearly 70% of respondents feel that having a diverse workforce has a positive, or major positive effect on a firm’s attractiveness as an employer as it positively impacts problem solving and driving innovation.
1(Major
negative effect)
23
(No effect)4
5(Major
positive effect)
Average
Staff retention 1.0% 2.6% 42.4% 37.6% 16.4% 3.66
Employee motivation 1.2% 3.3% 45.4% 34.4% 15.7% 3.89
Attractiveness as an employer 1.0% 1.9% 27.2% 46.3% 23.6% 3.90
Corporate productivity 1.2% 4.1% 45.6% 34.6% 14.6% 3.57
Problem solving 1.0% 3.3% 36.8% 39.0% 20.0% 3.74
Driving innovation 0.9% 1.4% 35.1% 40.5% 22.0% 3.81
AVERAGE 1.0% 2.8% 38.7% 38.7% 18.7% 3.76
16
About Astbury MarsdenAstbury Marsden is an international recruitment firm focussed on financial services, energy and professional services.
We specialise in recruiting uniquely talented people in business technology, business transformation, governance and specialist skills. We intimately understand the dynamics of the financial services, energy and professional services markets; making sure we know the people our clients need to occupy critical roles throughout their business. We help clients determine the people they need and then we find the best of them.
We have a global perspective and we are territory-neutral. We look for market identifiers that we recognise, and apply our experience and intelligence to solve the challenges they face. Our regional hubs established in London and Singapore allow us to serve our clients across EMEA and throughout Asia.
You can find more out at www.astburymarsden.com
Singapore
Mark O’Reilly65 Chulia Street, OCBC Centre, #43-01, Singapore 049513
+65 6709 5151
London
Adam Jackson33 Cannon Street, London EC4M 5SB
+44 (0)20 7065 1222
