How do you measure workplace inclusion without quotas or backlash (and still improve retention and performance)?

What inclusion metrics actually work at work (and how do leaders find exclusion hidden in daily employee experience)?

Measuring Inclusion by Paolo Gaudiano explains a practical, data-driven way to improve DEI outcomes by measuring inclusion (often by identifying exclusion), tracking progress over time, and tying actions to business results—without relying on representation targets. Continue reading to apply the framework: choose the employee experiences to measure, rank the biggest exclusion patterns, and turn the top findings into 30–90 day systemic fixes leaders can own and report on.

Recommendation

Companies that prioritize inclusion see higher profits and happier employees. Yet companies struggle to create truly inclusive workplaces, often facing resistance or uncertainty about the process. Inclusion expert Paolo Gaudiano offers a data-driven approach to improving workplace inclusion that helps business leaders tackle these issues. His practical strategies allow leaders to identify exclusion, implement meaningful change, and track progress with confidence. By shifting the focus from diversity metrics to employee experiences, organizations can foster a culture in which everyone thrives.

Take-Aways

• Inclusion is the critical factor in boosting business performance and worker satisfaction.
• Companies need to focus on systemic improvements, not diversity targets.
• Anti-DEI myths may sound persuasive, but they lack a logical basis.
• Measuring inclusivity is not a one-size-fits-all process.
• Data-driven insights and employee stories will help you uncover exclusion.
• Measure inclusion regularly and systematically.
• Focus on fixing broad, systemic issues — thus improving the experience for all employees.

Summary

Inclusion is the critical factor in boosting business performance and worker satisfaction.

Inclusion is the vital ingredient in impactful Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion (DEI) efforts. Without a deliberate focus on inclusion, attempts to boost diversity and generate equity will fail to generate the desired ROI. Consider: Companies that lack diversity often struggle with innovation due to their homogenous pool of opinions and ideas. A business’s efforts to boost employee diversity can bring people from different backgrounds into a shared workplace, but some workers may still feel overlooked or unheard. Similarly, claiming to want equity — that is, fair treatment for all employees — is all well and good. But when, in practice, some employees do not get the same opportunities as their peers, organizations see greater turnover and lower performance.

When employees feel valued and supported, they become more engaged, productive, creative, and likely to stay. Thus, investing in inclusion — taking action to identify and counter exclusionary aspects of the employee experience — allows you to unlock the benefits of a diverse workforce and, ultimately, leads to better financial performance.

“The very people who make decisions for the entire organization are least likely to understand what exclusion means.”

Measuring inclusion seems difficult because it is often invisible: People rarely notice their inclusion but quickly recognize their exclusion. This experience is similar to health: You don’t usually think about being healthy, but you know when you are sick or injured. Finding out how included your employees feel can be tricky. A company-wide survey that simply asks employees how included they feel is as ineffective as a doctor diagnosing an illness based on a patient’s general sense of well-being.

Instead, identify specific workplace experiences that negatively affect employees, categorize these experiences — such as issues with career growth or work-life balance — and trace these experiences to their sources, whether those are policies, managers, or leadership decisions. Identify and analyze patterns of exclusion to change harmful policies and fuel higher employee satisfaction, productivity, and retention.

Companies need to focus on systemic improvements, not diversity targets.

Many DEI efforts unintentionally generate backlash by focusing on diversity as a standalone metric rather than addressing the root causes of the exclusion of diverse workers. In many ways, this backlash makes sense: Though there is a demonstrated correlation between more diverse workplaces and increased performance, diversity initiatives that prioritize increasing representation without fostering inclusive environments tend to fail to demonstrate measurable business value.

Setting rigid diversity targets can create resentment within the workforce, leading to accusations of “reverse discrimination.” Quota-driven hiring decisions can also result in members of historically underrepresented groups (HUGs) feeling even more excluded as they fear co-workers questioning their qualifications. Striving for the perfect number of diverse workers within a company is less important — and, indeed, will likely result in worse outcomes — than ensuring that every worker within an organization feels equally valued and able to contribute.

Anti-DEI myths may sound persuasive, but they lack a logical basis.

Driving real change within a company requires that DEI professionals understand business realities and how to align inclusion efforts with organizational success — and show hard data proving value. They must also know how to debunk common arguments against DEI that stem from flawed assumptions or misleading narratives. Organizations sometimes claim there are not enough diverse candidates available. However, this purported “pipeline problem” is often self-created, as many organizations fail to cast a wide net when recruiting. Claims that hiring more diverse workers necessitates “lowering the bar” assume a well-defined standard for a “good” candidate exists when, in reality, hiring criteria are often subjective and shaped by existing biases. The notion of “meritocracy” is an illusion when systemic factors favor certain groups.

“The question shouldn’t be, ‘Why have homogeneous companies done so well?’ but rather, ‘Could companies that learn to become more inclusive gain a competitive edge over companies that don’t?”

Some white men attribute their denied promotions to DEI policies without considering the broader competitive process. Others dismiss the benefits of diversity by citing isolated cases of underperforming “diversity hires” — without ever thinking how they might feel if people judged all white male workers within their organizations based on the poor performance of one or more of their fellow white male colleagues. Similarly, some people point to the success of less diverse organizations in decades past. But this line of thinking is akin to saying company leaders should model their modern-day organizations after those from the pre-internet era — many of which were put out of business by the tech revolution. Organizations should not ask why homogeneous companies have succeeded in the past but how embracing inclusion can give them a competitive edge in the future.

Measuring inclusivity is not a one-size-fits-all process.

DEI progress results from more than good intentions. Progress requires actionable strategies, continuous measurement, and a willingness to listen to employee experiences. For example, a rapidly expanding consumer-focused start-up wanted to ensure a strong foundation of inclusion as it doubled in size. With leadership support, it implemented a structured approach to measuring workplace inclusion by embedding it into its annual engagement survey. Leaders asked employees about their experiences of exclusion across different categories and ranked the results to identify key problem areas. Through consistent measurement and targeted interventions — such as revising compensation policies — the company saw measurable improvements in inclusion scores each year. This commitment led to stronger retention, even during leadership transitions, and made the company a desirable employer for new hires.

“Any organization can measure inclusion on its own.”

Inclusion efforts reach beyond race and gender to consider job roles, work structures, and the full employee experience. For example, The Boys & Girls Club of Metro Atlanta sought to deepen its DEI efforts by conducting an “Inclusion Assessment.” While they expected to find racial disparities in employee experiences, the most surprising insight came from job classification: Part-time employees — who made up most of their workforce — felt disengaged and excluded from decision-making. Recognizing this issue, the organization focused on increasing opportunities for part-time staff to contribute, providing them with more professional development, and ensuring they knew the organization valued them.

Data-driven insights and employee stories will help you uncover exclusion.

Gathering and analyzing inclusion data involves collecting workplace experiences, cleaning the data, and categorizing issues using tools such as the “Inclusion Navigator” — a dashboard tool that Paolo Gaudiano and his team developed to help organizations visualize and explore patterns and trends of exclusion. This tool allows companies to measure the “Prevalence” of a given issue within their organizations — calculating how widespread a specific kind of exclusion is, based on the number of employees who mention it — and its “Severity” — the average number of times it occurs. These two metrics combine to form an “Exclusion Score,” which paints a picture of the overall scope of the types of exclusions employees mention. By ranking experience categories and sources, organizations can pinpoint specific areas needing improvement, such as leadership behavior or company policies.

Analyzing qualitative data provides deeper insights into workplace inclusion by capturing employee experiences. While surveys can show which groups feel excluded, firsthand stories illustrate precisely how and why exclusion happens. Common themes include lack of respect, favoritism in promotions, and exclusion from meetings or decision-making. For example, women often report being interrupted in meetings or overlooked for leadership roles. By examining these patterns, organizations can identify systemic biases and implement targeted solutions, such as structured promotion processes or inclusive meeting practices.

“It has happened to me more than once that the leader of an organization broke down in tears after learning what was happening to their employees under their watch.”

Even when data proves the presence of exclusion, frustrations may arise around DEI initiatives from both majority and underrepresented groups. Some employees feel sidelined by diversity-focused hiring, while others regard DEI as performative rather than meaningful change. Members of historically underrepresented groups (HUGs) express concerns about companies using them as tokens or having to carry the burden of educating others. These insights reinforce the need for organizations to move beyond surface-level diversity metrics and focus on inclusion strategies that improve workplace culture for all employees.

Measure inclusion regularly and systematically.

Measuring inclusion allows organizations to identify systemic barriers to equity, understand employee experiences, and implement meaningful change. By following these steps, companies can move beyond vague diversity initiatives and take actionable steps to foster a more equitable environment:

1. Educate leadership — Secure leadership buy-in by demonstrating the positive effects of inclusion on financial performance and workplace culture. Use workshops and data to show that measuring inclusion is an actionable, results-driven approach rather than a social responsibility effort.
2. Engage the entire organization — Communicate why you are measuring inclusion company-wide. Transparency about the process and its goals increases participation from both majority and underrepresented groups, fostering trust and collaboration.
3. “Collect inclusion data” — Use surveys, employee feedback platforms, or external assessments to gather workplace experiences. Prioritize anonymity and psychological safety to encourage honest participation, thus ensuring data accurately reflects employee realities.
4. Analyze data for key insights — Identify patterns of exclusion by assessing the most affected experience categories and their sources. Compare results across demographics to pinpoint disparities and apply stories to contextualize the numbers.
5. Develop and implement solutions — Address problem areas with targeted initiatives, such as revising promotion policies, making meetings more inclusive, or improving work-life balance structures. Focus on practical, immediate changes that create measurable benefits.
6. Share findings and next steps — Communicate results, planned actions, and expected improvements for employees. Keep your workforce informed to reinforce trust, encourage accountability, and set the stage for ongoing improvement.

Measuring inclusion is an ongoing process organizations must revisit to track progress and adjust as necessary. By regularly assessing workplace inclusion, organizations can stay ahead of issues, foster a culture of belonging, and improve employee satisfaction and retention.

Focus on fixing broad, systemic issues — thus improving the experience for all employees.

Implementing measuring inclusion requires strategic engagement with leadership and employees. Leadership plays a critical role because they allocate resources and shape workplace culture, yet are often the least aware of how exclusion manifests within their organizations. To gain their buy-in, communicate the business case for inclusion by demonstrating how a more equitable workplace leads to increased productivity, higher retention, and financial benefits.

“Stop focusing on diversity alone as the cause of feelings of exclusion, and recognize that it is poor behaviors that lead to feelings of exclusion.”

Employees need reassurance that their participation in inclusion efforts will lead to real change. Effective communication about the project’s goals, coupled with clear confidentiality measures, encourages greater engagement and trust. Address potential legal, compliance, and cybersecurity concerns to forestall concerns about the risks of collecting sensitive data. Proper data anonymization and security protocols can mitigate these concerns.

After completing data collection, focus on identifying broad trends rather than over-analyzing small, isolated data points. Many organizations fall into the trap of over-segmentation, attempting to draw conclusions from tiny sample sizes within specific demographic groups. Instead of examining who exclusion affects, organizations should prioritize the most common workplace challenges — lack of respect, biased promotions — and why they occur — ineffective leadership, and unclear policies. This approach ensures that inclusion efforts address systemic issues rather than individual experiences.

Organizations should focus on improving workplace conditions for everyone rather than designing narrowly targeted interventions for specific identity groups. For example, say that the data shows that women experience higher exclusion in career advancement. If you prioritize promotion transparency, you will not only benefit women employees but everyone within your organization. Companies must frame inclusion as a universal benefit, avoiding zero-sum-game narratives that create resentment. By focusing on structural improvements rather than demographic representation, companies foster an environment where diversity naturally increases as a by-product of a more inclusive culture.

About the Author

Paolo Gaudiano is the chief scientist of the nonprofit Aleria, president of ARC, an adjunct professor at New York University’s Stern School of Business, and chairman of the Diversity & Inclusion Research Conference.