{"id":3871,"date":"2026-04-21T14:41:37","date_gmt":"2026-04-21T12:41:37","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/floriamoghimi.de\/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-in-companies-ten-measures-that-will-get-you-ahead\/"},"modified":"2026-06-11T12:35:30","modified_gmt":"2026-06-11T10:35:30","slug":"diversity-equity-and-inclusion-in-companies-ten-measures","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/floriamoghimi.de\/en\/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-in-companies-ten-measures\/","title":{"rendered":"Diversity, equity and inclusion in companies: Ten measures that will get you ahead"},"content":{"rendered":"

[vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=””]<\/p>\n

Diversity, equity and inclusion: there are more and more initiatives, programs and internal communities in companies. And yet the impact falls short of expectations. This is usually due to the way DEI is thought about. <\/h3>\n

After all, it is no longer just about internal culture or voluntary commitment. At European level, the topic is increasingly being anchored in regulation. Directives such as the EU Pay Transparency Directive, the Corporate Sustainability Reporting Directive<\/a> or existing anti-discrimination laws oblige companies to demonstrably implement equality, fairness and transparency. Diversity, equity and inclusion in companies is therefore no longer a “nice-to-have”, but part of governance, compliance and risk management. Politically, the direction is clear. <\/p>\n

Nevertheless, many organizations still act as if the topic can be dealt with in isolation. A training course here, an employee network there. Certainly valuable for individuals. But parallel to the “actual business”. That is precisely the error in thinking. <\/p>\n

DEI is not an add-on program.<\/p>\n

It is a contemporary, fair, well thought-out organizational and HR practice. With measures that should exist anyway, only made more consistent, transparent and inclusive. Scientific studies (e.g. by Dobbin\/Kalev)<\/a> and actual practice show that DEI is effective where decisions are made: DEI is effective where it intervenes in decisions and structures.<\/p>\n

[\/vc_column_text][\/vc_column][\/vc_row][vc_row][vc_column][vc_column_text css=””]<\/p>\n

\n
\n

1. recruiting: Who comes into your system in the first place?<\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

Many companies rely heavily on traditional channels such as employee referrals or platforms like LinkedIn. The problem is well known: Networks are homogeneous. Recruiting via recommendations often reproduces existing structures. <\/p>\n

This is exactly where an inclusive sourcing strategy comes in. It specifically expands the talent pool, actively addresses groups and challenges existing barriers to entry. It is crucial that recruiting is active. If you only wait for broader groups of people to apply than before, you are implicitly deciding against diversity. <\/p>\n<\/div>\n<\/div>\n

<\/h3>\n
\n
\n

2. job advertisements: Deterrent or attractive?<\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

Research shows that certain wording is a deliberate deterrent. Long lists of requirements or highly coded language mean that women or other underrepresented groups in particular are less likely to apply, even if they are qualified. <\/p>\n

Organizations that revise their job descriptions often see two effects at the same time: larger and more diverse applicant pools and shorter time to fill. This is a classic example of how small structural adjustments can have a big impact. <\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n<\/div>\n

\n

3. interviews: Where bias has a direct effect<\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

Unstructured interviews are among the greatest risk factors for bias. Sympathy, similarity and gut feeling play a bigger role than many believe. <\/p>\n

Here, too, the research is clear: structured interviews in which all candidates are assessed using the same criteria are not only fairer, but also significantly more valid in predicting job performance.<\/p>\n

Nevertheless, many organizations continue to work with informal discussion formats. Why? Because they seem more flexible. And people often feel more comfortable using supposed knowledge of human nature as a decision-making factor than conducting targeted and objective interviews. In practice, this often leads to inconsistent and biased decisions. Companies that take diversity, equity and inclusion seriously standardize decision-making processes where they are particularly susceptible to unconscious bias<\/a>. <\/p>\n

<\/h3>\n

4th promotion: The diversity, equity and inclusion void<\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

While the focus is often on recruiting, internal career processes often remain opaque. If it is unclear what is required for the next career step, informal factors are decisive. Proximity to managers, self-promotion or cultural fit gain in importance. <\/p>\n

This is precisely where many injustices arise.<\/p>\n

Transparent career and promotion models counteract this. They clearly define which skills are expected at which level and how development is possible. <\/p>\n

Studies show that a lack of transparency puts women and people of color at a particular disadvantage because they have less access to informal information and networks.<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

<\/h3>\n

5. leadership: the biggest lever is in everyday life<\/h3>\n

 <\/p>\n

Most differences in everyday working life are not the result of guidelines, but of daily decisions made by managers.<\/p>\n