Blog Viewer

Volume LIV, Number 2

From Compliance to Inclusion: Implementing an Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Action Plan for a Federal Funding Program in Canada

Terry Campbell
University of Ottawa

Valérie Bourbonnais
University of Ottawa

Abstract

Like many other countries, Canada’s academic system has been challenged to achieve proportionate representation of historically underrepresented groups. Canadian equity law identifies four designated groups (FDG) for whom conditions of disadvantage shall be corrected: women, Indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities, and members of visible minorities. In 2006 the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal issued a settlement agreement with the Canada Research Chairs program, a federally-funded research program, in response to a complaint concerning the lack of representation of the FDG among the program’s appointed Chairs. The agreement identified a series of measures and actions, such as setting equity targets and ongoing tracking, that the Program would undertake. In 2017, due to lack of progress in improving equitable participation in the Program, the Program established new requirements for institutions to develop equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) action plans.

This case study examines how the University of Ottawa implemented its EDI action plan to meet the regulatory compliance requirements of this national research chairs funding program, and how it used the plan to help drive equity, diversity and inclusion activities at its institution. The study describes the activities undertaken by the Vice-President Research Office, including the analyses conducted to identify barriers to participation in the program, actions taken, and results achieved. Over a two-year period, the University recruited more than 20 research chairs from underrepresented groups, thereby meeting all equity targets and exceeding targets for three of four groups.

In conjunction with the initial implementation of the EDI plan, broader institutional level activities were undertaken, including creation of an advisory committee that guided the development of a broader EDI in Research Action Plan.

Key observations from this study are: effective equity, diversity and inclusion strategies are sustained efforts which are context-specific; compliance requirements can be effective incentives if implemented as part of a larger institutional transformation; and research administrators have a key role to play in this area, which is part of their expanding tool kit.

Keywords: research management; equity, diversity, inclusion, action plan; canada research chairs

Background

Similar to many other countries, Canada’s academic system has been challenged to achieve proportionate representation of historically underrepresented groups. In their comparative analysis of Canada, United States, United Kingdom and Australia, Henry et al. (2017) noted that irrespective of the differences in how these four countries categorize the academic work force, there is evidence that underrepresentation occurs everywhere, with women underrepresented relative to men across all groups, and evidence of significant differences in the representation of historically racialized groups. This under-representation points to long-standing, inflexible barriers to access and participation (Henry et al., 2017).

Canada’s federal employment equity law defines four designated groups (FDG): women, Aboriginal people (referred to as Indigenous peoples), persons with disabilities, and members of visible minorities (Employment Equity Act, 1995). The Canadian Human Rights Commission oversees enforcement of this law whose purpose is to ensure that all Canadians have equal access to the labour market and that employers correct the disadvantages that individuals in these groups experience (Canadian Human Rights Commission, 2022).  

In 2003, a complaint was filed with the Canadian Human Rights Commission against the Canada Research Chairs Program, a federally-funded research chairs program established in 2000, concerning the lack of representation of the four designated groups among the program’s appointed Chairs. In 2006 the Canadian Human Rights Tribunal issued a settlement agreement in which the Program agreed to implement a series of measures and actions, such as setting equity targets and ongoing tracking, to address the equity issues raised by the complainants (Canadian Human Rights Tribunal, 2006).

Following its initial implementation of the settlement agreement, the Canada Research Chairs Program reviewed progress as part of its regular five-year program evaluations. In the first evaluation, evaluators recommended that universities be more transparent in their Chair selection and renewal processes; however, the next evaluation in 2016 was more critical, focusing on the fact that universities were not meeting their equity targets (Canada Research Chairs Program, 2010, 2016). In response to this 15th-year evaluation of the Program, the Program released its own Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Action Plan in spring 2017 which included additional requirements for institutions—some to be met by October of that same year, and the remainder to be completed two years later, in December 2019 (Canada Research Chairs Program, May 2017).

This case study focuses on how a Canadian university, the University of Ottawa, implemented its Institutional EDI Action Plan to meet the regulatory compliance requirements of the Canada Research Chairs Program, and how it used this to help drive equity, diversity and inclusion activities at its institution. 

Program Requirements

The Canada Research Chairs Program is a federal program which funds more than 2000 research chairs in Canadian universities. The Program aims are “to attract and retain excellent researchers in Canadian universities; to improve universities’ capacity for generating and applying new knowledge; to strengthen the training of highly qualified personnel (HQP); and to optimize the use of research resources through strategic planning” (Canada Research Chairs Program, 2010, p. 1). 

Institutions are awarded two types of Chairs (Tier 1 for senior researchers and Tier 2 for early career researchers) based on the amount of research funding the researchers at their institution have received over the three previous years from the three federal granting agencies (SSHRC; NSERC; CIHR). Universities then nominate researchers to receive these Chairs. These nominations are peer-reviewed and awarded by the Program.

The Canada Research Chairs Equity, Diversity and Inclusion compliance requirements and timelines were: 1. Posting of Public accountability statements on institutional website (October 27, 2017); 2. Development of Institutional Equity Action Plan (December 15, 2017); and 3. All Equity targets would be met (December 2019) (Canada Research Chairs Program, 2017). Action Plans were required to pass the Program’s peer review process. Institutions were required to meet all requirements in order to receive ongoing funding from the Program.

In 2017, the University of Ottawa, one of Canada’s research-intensive universities, had an allocation of 75 Canada Research Chairs. The bilingual institution located in the nation’s capital of Ottawa was in a rapid growth phase, with a student population of 41,800; 1,250 regular professors; and research revenues which exceeded $320 M. It had met its CRC targets for only one designated group (visible minorities).

The Canada Research Chairs program defines equity as “…the removal of systemic barriers and biases enabling all individuals to have equal access to and to benefit from the program.” Diversity is “… differences in race, colour, place of origin, religion, immigrant and newcomer status, ethnic origin, ability, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, gender expression, and age” and “…must be accompanied by concerted and meaningful efforts to ensure inclusion.”  Finally, inclusion is “…the practice of ensuring that all individuals are valued and respected for their contributions and equally supported…” (Canada Research Chairs Program, 2021a, para. 1). 

Development and Implementation of Institutional EDI Action Plan

The Vice-President, Research was responsible for the development of the uOttawa Canada Research Chairs Institutional EDI Action Plan (IEDIAP). These activities were led by the University Research Office, Research Management Services, the unit responsible for the internal management of the university’s Canada Research Chairs program (CRC).

A review was undertaken of the University’s policy and administrative context to inform the development of the Action Plan. This employment systems review included an overview of institutional policies and practices related to the university’s management of its CRC allocation, equity data collection, resource allocation, and retention and inclusivity. The review showed that the university had significant gaps in the representation of all four designated employment equity groups in all employment categories, as indicated in the university’s 2016 employment equity report to the Federal government (University of Ottawa, 2019).
Staff also conducted a comparative review of existing CRC holders (2013 to 2018) to assess disparities within the distribution of chairs (men, women, visible minorities) and the level of support provided to these groups. Annual start-up funds, tri-agency participation rates and levels of tri-agency research funding were analyzed. Any identified issues were addressed in the action plan, for example, the process for awarding start-up funds was revised and standardized. Feedback was also provided by the Working Group on Diversity and Inclusion, Employment Equity. This group included senior leaders from faculty affairs, human resources, human rights office, and the research office. Members provided advice and support on how to address gaps in University policy (for example, development of a preferential hiring policy). 

This analysis identified barriers and practices that could adversely affect the participation of individuals from the FDGs, namely: 

1) The inability to recruit sufficient candidates from the FDGs and the lack of mandatory training on the impact of unconscious bias for those involved in the recruitment; 2) The lack of standardized data to monitor and report on performance, both at the institutional level and for CRC holders; 3) The lack of focused attention on activities to support the retention and inclusion of Chairs who are members of the FDGs; and 4) The need for greater institutional commitment to diversity and inclusion. (University of Ottawa, 2019 p. 5)

The university’s linguistic requirement that professors teach in both English and French was another challenge. This requirement further restricts the pool of candidates in that a mere 4% of the world’s population (300 million) are French speakers (Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie, 2018). 

The Action Plan identified actions and indicators to address these barriers (University of Ottawa, 2019, pp. 15-18) (See Annex). The Plan was reviewed internally by key stakeholders and selected Chairholders from the FDGs prior to submission to the national program for peer review. Regular progress reports were provided to the university’s senior administration as well as the national program.

Results

In order to meet Program requirements, the original CRC EDI action plan submitted to the CRC Program in December 2017 was updated twice (in December 2018 and September 2019). In early 2020, the latest revision received the ranking of “Satisfy”, an indication that the University could continue to submit new Chair nominations and renewals to the Program.

During the implementation of the CRC EDI Action Plan (from 2017-2020), the University achieved the following results: 1) Increased the representation of the FDGs amongst CRC holders (Table 1 below): the university met all targets set by the CRC Program and exceeded targets for three of the four designated groups (women, visible minorities and Indigenous peoples). Between 2017 and 2020, the university successfully recruited a total of 21 CRC holders belonging to one or more of the FDGs. These Chairs, representing various fields and disciplines, both national and international (U.K, U.S. etc.) recruits, with a limited number of internal nominations, will be instrumental in advancing the university’s research in the coming years. 2) In collaboration with key sectors across campus, Research Management Services (RMS) incorporated EDI in the recruitment and selection processes by: providing mandatory unconscious bias training; developing and implementing preferential and selected hiring mechanisms; reviewing internal CRC recruitment guidelines with an EDI lens to limit barriers and increase transparency; and appointing the Special Advisor to the President on Diversity and Inclusion to sit on all selection committees for CRC recruitments. 3) With regards to data collection and reporting, a self-identification form was developed to collect self-reported data of CRC applicants, and gender-based analysis of current CRC holders was performed. Lastly, in terms of strengthening institutional commitment to EDI, in 2018 the Vice-President of Research launched the IDÉE committee to identify EDI priorities for the broader research community. This committee recommended creating a dedicated EDI full-time staff position to lead the development of a broader uOttawa EDI Action Plan for Research, establishing EDI targets for internal Chairs programs, and improving equity and diversity considerations in the selection of Prizes and Awards.

Table 1. uOttawa Target Setting Findings for the Four Designated Groups 2017-2020

Source: Internal self-identification data, Research Management Services.
*Numbers suppressed due to small cell size.

In spring 2019, the University of Ottawa was selected as one of 17 Dimensions program pilot sites, a program led by the federal tri-agencies to recognize the equity, diversity and inclusion (EDI) achievements of Canadian post-secondary institutions. The objective of the program is to support cultural change that eliminates obstacles and inequities within the research community (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, 2021a). This program is part of a suite of tri-agency commitments to EDI in research which includes fair access to tri-agency research support and equitable participation in the research system (Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council, 2021b).

Other accomplishments of the CRC EDI Action Plan included: a Women Research Chairs mentoring group (of approximately 20 individuals) was established in 2019/2020; EDI was included in key strategic planning activities such as the University’s Strategic Plan and the uOttawa Strategic Research Plan 2020-2025; in-house training sessions on Diversity and Inclusion were provided to senior leaders of the Vice-President Research Office to foster a leadership culture of inclusion. 

New CRC EDI Targets

In July 2019, the CRC Program reached an agreement with the plaintiffs of the 2006 Canadian Human Rights Settlement Agreement which outlines the terms of a revised agreement (“2019 Addendum”) (Canada Research Chairs Program, 2021b). The Addendum includes setting new equity targets for universities to progressively meet over the next 10 years (Table 2). The University is updating its CRC EDI Action Plan to meet these targets. As of June 2021, the CRC Program reported that 85% (N: 55/65) of institutions had met their December 2019 equity targets (Canada Research Chairs Program, 2021c).

Table 2. uOttawa CRC EDI Targets for Four Designated Groups (2019 and 2029)

Additional Actions

In late 2020, the Vice-President Research Office commenced work on the EDI Action Plan for Research to extend EDI to the broader research community. The action plan identifies actions to support institutional commitment to EDI in research, whose goal is to develop an inclusive climate in which systemic barriers are addressed so that uOttawa researchers and trainees from underrepresented or disadvantaged groups can fully participate. This work is guided by an advisory committee composed of a cross-section of University research community members (researchers, graduate students, staff members) representing underrepresented groups, members of key research governance bodies and professors whose research focusses on EDI-relevant areas. The Action Plan addresses five underrepresented groups (women, visible minorities/racialized persons, Indigenous peoples, persons with disabilities, LGBTQ12S+ community members) and identifies four main recommendations: 1) build awareness and recognize excellence; 2) strengthen professional development; 3) provide institutional support and infrastructure; and 4) measure needs, evaluate performance and document lessons learned (University of Ottawa, 2021). In order to maximize integration and impact, the committee ensures close linkages with the University’s EDI Strategy which is under development, as well as other related initiatives underway, including an anti-racism task force and the University’s participation in the Dimensions Pilot.

Evaluation and Analysis

In implementing its CRC EDI Action Plan, the Vice-President Research Office clearly achieved the equity targets set out by the Canada Research Chairs Program and it completed the activities identified in the plan. However, it is unlikely these activities alone would have achieved lasting change because diversity measures by themselves generally have limited effectiveness and more inclusive approaches are necessary to address systemic inequities.  

From Diversity to Inclusion

Several aspects of the uOttawa CRC EDI Action Plan focus on standard diversity measures, such as the diversity of applicants versus those hired, number of individuals who have taken implicit bias training, number of venues where jobs were posted, number of selection committee memberships approved, and progress towards meeting equity targets. There is mixed evidence on the effectiveness of diversity activities and whether they increase the representation of marginalized groups or reduce discrimination (Noon, 2017). While diversity training or implicit bias training workshops are widely used, there is little evidence of their long-term effectiveness and they may have unintended negative impacts (Dobbin & Kalev, 2018). 

Moss-Racusin et al. (2014) note that diversity training programs which place pressure or blame on participants appear least effective in addressing implicit bias. Rather, they propose that training approaches: be grounded in scientific evidence; use active learning techniques, such as problem-solving and group discussion; and be regularly evaluated. This will increase the likelihood of their improving participants’ awareness of diversity issues and increasing their propensity to take action. Failing this, they argue that interventions are more likely to uphold the existing system which perpetuates biases. Perceptions and institutional culture can also mitigate effectiveness. Dover, Major and Kaiser (2016) found that diversity measures can be perceived as discriminatory and unfair treatment by members of privileged groups, such as whites and men. Further, Sinclair (National Academies of Science, 2020) notes that how colleges frame diversity is more often geared to the preference of the establishment than the needs of ethnic minorities.  

To improve the effectiveness of diversity training, Dobbin and Kalev (2018) suggest that it be included in a wider program of change. Such a program of change will necessarily focus on creating an inclusive work environment. In higher education, Stefani and Blessinger (2018) note, “…building a culture and mindset of inclusion is imperative in order to create a meaningful learning environment that embraces and values diversity.” This perspective is consistent with the growing body of management literature on inclusive leadership (Creary et al., 2021; Ferdman et al., 2020; Moss, 2019; Bourke & Espedido, 2020).

Creating Inclusive Environments through Transformative Change

Bilimoria, Joy and Liang (2008) note that simplistic solutions cannot address systematic, historical, and widespread inequities in academia; rather comprehensive transformation, which addresses organizational systems, structures and processes and individual practices is needed. Such transformation will address key academic career transitions, such as recruitment, promotion and tenure and progress through the pipeline, including leadership roles. Crimmins (2020) notes the need for cohesive commitment by academic organizations and individuals with strong support for diversity and inclusion embedded across all schools and centers in an institution.

An important example of a transformative approach is the U.S. National Science Foundation ADVANCE Institutional Transformation program, started in 2001, which encourages institutions of higher education to address aspects of academic culture and institutional change. Rich findings have emerged from the experiences of the more than 40 institutions which have participated in this program whose aim is to increase participation of women in the science and engineering workforce (National Science Foundation, 2021). Mechanisms to support retention and development include: faculty workload (O’Meara et al., 2019); faculty networks (O'Meara & Stromquist, 2015); networking and mentoring micro-grants for pre-tenure faculty (Virginia Technical Institute, 2010); and departmental sessions on culture and climate (Bowen & Debinski, 2012). 

Bilimoria and Singer (2019) identified numerous effective practices for gender equity transformation from the Case Western University ADVANCE study at the individual, department/faculty and institutional levels (See Figure 1). Outcomes achieved by the six research institutions involved in its IDEAL program included institutionalization of climate surveys, faculty development positions or offices, mentoring programs, search committee workshops and participation in university-wide initiatives such as hiring initiatives. 

The uOttawa CRC EDI Action Plan contained some transformative elements but was not comprehensive. For example, key internal factors, such as senior administration support and involvement, clear vision with milestones, visibility of actions and outcomes were put in place. In addition, clear outcomes were identified (e.g., increased representation of the FDGs), and the transformation was institutionalized through new structures, tools, and processes for recruitment. The fact that the Chairs were highly coveted, prestigious research positions used for external recruitment provided an opportunity to showcase the value and results of the centrally-administered structured recruitment processes that faculties were required to follow. This helped to drive further reflection and additional changes within the university, for example, a request by some faculty members that EDI be a consideration in all academic recruitment processes and that it be reflected in the selection process for the internal research chairs program.

As uOttawa has moved forward in developing a broader EDI in Research Action Plan, it has built on the momentum created and lessons learned from implementing the CRC EDI Action Plan. This has included broadening the scope of stakeholder involvement and imbedding engagement and consultation throughout its development processes. An in-house survey of Canada Research Chairholders on their experiences and EDI activities within their research teams provided valuable information to inform the plan (University of Ottawa, 2021). The implementation of the plan will help the University address aspects of academic culture and will drive institutional change to promote a more inclusive workplace where members of underrepresented or disadvantaged groups are valued for their contributions and have a strong sense of belonging.  

Figure 1. Effective Practices for Gender Equity Transformation from Case Western University’s ADVANCE Institutional Program, 2003-2008

Recommendations and Lessons Learned

Key observations from this study are: effective equity, diversity and inclusion strategies are sustained efforts which are context-specific; and research administrators can play a key leadership role in supporting EDI.

Implementation is Context-Specific

There is a growing body of literature that indicates diversity improves the quality of scientific outputs (Valantine & Collins, 2015) and on the effectiveness of individual diversity and inclusion activities themselves; however much more work needs to be done. Ultimately it is important to recognize that equity, diversity, and inclusion initiatives are cultural transformation activities. Academia has been slow to respond to the opportunities that diversity presents, and it is unlikely to change quickly in dismantling systemic power structures that have been insurmountable barriers to progress. 

Because the focus of EDI is to identify and address systemic barriers to participation, including examining those conditions under which they occurred, this work is context-specific, and it must engage the individuals affected. “Nothing about us, without us” must be a guiding principle. Tools such as critical race theory can be useful to examine power differentials and promote understanding of concepts, such as intersectionality (Crichlow, 2015). 

Internal and external factors such as institution size; type; demographics; language; location; local culture and heritage; governance; and regional geopolitics can contribute to barriers. How these barriers are constructed within the institutional ecosystem will in turn influence the strategies and actions needed to create equitable access. For example, consider the 2020 murder of George Floyd, a Black man, by police officers in the United States and the increasing prominence of the Black Lives Matter movement. This tragedy sparked outrage throughout the world, and yet the internalization of this event was experienced differently in various cultures. In Canadian universities, the response, while dramatic, was more muted than in the U.S. and it focused primarily on civil discourse about racism (Corbet & Garriga, 2020). 

To some degree, the CRC EDI action plans in Canadian universities are reflective of institutional characteristics and local situations. Smaller universities which are more regionally focused and have fewer research chairs tend to encounter fewer problems in achieving their targets, while research intensive universities, which were located in urban centres and had medical schools, have struggled. Several large universities have been criticized for tokenism because they implemented aggressive preferential hiring strategies to meet the targets. This has prompted fears about faculty retention (Peters, 2022). While the CRC program has not released a public report which assesses the plans, it appears that research-intensive universities have focused primarily on recruitment, training, and data collection activities. On the other hand, some regional universities which had explicit commitments to equity, diversity, and inclusion prior to the implementation of the CRC requirements have launched innovative inclusion activities, such as an EDI in research web page to support researchers building EDI into their research programs and a collaborative CRC Network for sharing expertise and EDI best practices. When considering EDI in the international context, other influences, such as national and regional geopolitics and the legal and jurisdictional focus of EDI, come into play. For example, in North America the emphasis is on diversity while Asia and Western Europe focus on women but exclude other minority groups (Stefani & Blessinger, 2018).

EDI is Part of the Toolkit for Research Administrators

EDI expertise is an integral part of the growing skill set for all research administrators whether they are leaders of EDI initiatives, delivering client services to their diverse research community or to their own research administration teams. This expertise is of critical importance in Canada as federal funders continue their rollout of equity, diversity and inclusion initiatives and expectations. In EDI the research administrator works with counterparts at funding agencies to clarify policy and to serve as change agents and problem-solvers, filling a critical gap between the scientist and the funder, engaged in activities which are imbedded and specific to the evolving research and innovation ecosystem (Agostinho et al., 2020; Reardon, 2021). Such a role can help facilitate a culture change in academia in which research administrators’ skills are more highly-valued (Payne, 2021).

Research administrators in formal EDI leadership roles undertake such activities as: establishing diverse research teams through inclusive leadership practices; promoting organizational learning and change through establishing networks and communities of practice; and leading and championing of institutional EDI initiatives. For front-line administrators, a basic EDI toolkit might include the following:

1. self-reflection: developing self-awareness of biases and privileges and undertaking personal growth strategies to be inclusive and to support mutuality and understanding;
2. allyship: developing an enabling mindset; identifying barriers and supporting equitable access for individual clients;
3. tools for EDI in research: developing skills to support clients in meeting sponsors’ EDI requirements in programs and activities; pursuing customized EDI in research and research design training (e.g., sex- and gender-based analysis); developing tools and providing training to clients; and
4. awareness of institutional resources: becoming knowledgeable about institutional EDI resources, such as human rights, harassment, affinity groups, mentoring and networking activities for self, team, and clients.

All research administrators, regardless of their role, will greatly benefit from formal training in EDI concepts and methods. Since the start of its CRC EDI Action Plan, two University of Ottawa team members completed EDI certification programs, and a third EDI practitioner with PhD research expertise was hired, thus increasing the value of their leadership contributions to the University’s ongoing cultural transformation. Other positions have been created centrally and in some faculties.  

Conclusion 

A diverse and inclusive research ecosystem creates the conditions where all can thrive and create innovative and impactful research. An in-depth understanding of discrimination and exclusion is necessary in order to address systemic, historical and widespread inequities in academia. The most effective strategies are sustained efforts that are context-specific and which address identified barriers. Federal compliance requirements can be effective incentives if implemented as part of a larger institutional transformation which includes cross-institutional partnerships and collaborations, effective change management and communications strategies, and evaluation frameworks which measure impact. Research administrators can play a key leadership role in this organizational journey, both on the front lines working with researchers to provide equitable and inclusive services, and in formal roles leading the development of equity, diversity, and inclusion strategies. Through this, they can help to heal the past and shape the future, creating an inclusive climate where all can thrive.

The University of Ottawa acknowledges and honours that its campus sits on the traditional unceded territory of the Omamìwìnini Anishnàbeg (Algonquin).

Authors’ Note

Correspondence concerning this article should be addressed to Terry Campbell, the primary author. She can be reached by email at terry.campbell@uottawa.ca or by phone at (613) 286-3976. The authors thank the Office of the Vice-President, Research and Innovation for its support of this project and permission to use materials. 

References

Agostinho, M., Moniz Alves, C., Aresta, S., Borrego, F., Borlido-Santos, J., Cortez, J., Lima Costa, T., António Lopes, J., Moreira, S., Santos, J., Trindade, M., Varela, S., & Vidal, S. (2020). The interface of science: The case for a broader definition of research management. Perspectives: Policy and Practice in Higher Education, 24(1), 19-27. https://www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/13603108.2018.1543215

Bilimoria, D., Joy, S., & Liang, X. (2008). Breaking barriers and creating inclusiveness: Lessons of organizational transformation to advance women faculty in academic science and engineering. Human Resource Management, 47(3), 423–441. https://doi.org/10.1002/hrm.20225

Bilimoria, D., & Singer, L. T. (2019). Institutions Developing Excellence in Academic Leadership (IDEAL). Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal, 38(3), 362–381. https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-10-2017-0209

Bourke, J., & Espedido, A. (2020, March 6). The key to inclusive leadership. Harvard Business Review. https://hbr.org/2020/03/the-key-to-inclusive-leadership

Bowen, B. S., & Debinski, D. M. (2012, October 28). ISU ADVANCE final report. https://www.advance.iastate.edu/sites/default/files/Additional%20Resources/History/IowaStateADV-FinalReport-Public-Approved-2013.pdf

Canada Research Chairs Program. (2017). Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Action Plan. https://www.chairs-chaires.gc.ca/program-programme/equity-equite/action_plan-plan_action-eng.aspx

Canada Research Chairs Program. (2017, May 17). Letter to the university presidents who participate in the Canada Research Chairs Program. https://www.chairs-chaires.gc.ca/whats_new-quoi_de_neuf/2017/letter_to_presidents-lettre_aux_presidents-eng.aspx

Canada Research Chairs Program. (2016, June 14). Evaluation of the Canada Research Chairs Program [Final report], by Goss Gilroy. Cat. No. CR22-66; ISBN 978-0-660-05841-2. https://www.chairs-chaires.gc.ca/about_us-a_notre_sujet/publications/evaluations/chairs_ evaluation-chaires_evaluation-eng.aspx

Canada Research Chairs Program. (2010, December 8). Tenth-Year Evaluation of the Canada Research Chairs Program Final Evaluation Report, by Science-Metrix. https://www.chairs-chaires.gc.ca/about_us-a_notre_sujet/ publications/ten_year_ evaluation_e.pdf

Canada Research Chairs Program. (2021a). How does the program define equity, diversity and inclusion? Retrieved July 26, 2021 from https://www.chairs-chaires.gc.ca/program-programme/equity-equite/faqs-questions_frequentes-eng.aspx#5d

Canada Research Chairs Program. (2021b). 2021 Canadian Human Rights Settlement Agreement. Retrieved July 27, 2021 from https://www.chairs-chaires.gc.ca/program-programme/equity-equite/index-eng.aspx#2021_settlement

Canada Research Chairs Program. (2021c). Program representation statistics. Retrieved July 24, 2021 from https://www.chairs-chaires.gc.ca/about_us-a_notre_sujet/statistics-statistiques-eng.aspx

Canadian Human Rights Commission. (2022). About the Employment Equity Act. Retrieved August 22, 2022 from https://www.employmentequitychrc.ca/en/about-employment-equity-act

Canadian Human Rights Tribunal. (2006). Settlement Agreement. Tribunal File No. T11118/9905. https://parl.ext.unb.ca/Settlement-signed2.nov06pdf.pdf

Corbet, S., & Garriga, N. (2020, June 2). Tensions mar Paris protest as Floyd outrage goes global. CTV News.  https://apnews.com/article/ap-top-news-riots-paris-international-news-virus-outbreak-f01b2aff643b80533b53a04f2909de06

Creary, S. J., Rothbard, N., & Scruggs, J. (2021, May). Improving workplace culture through evidence-based diversity, equity and inclusion practices. The Wharton School of the University of Pennsylvania. https://www.wharton.upenn.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/05/Applied-Insights-Lab-Report.pdf

Crimmins, G. (2020). Inclusion in practice: Operationalising principles of inclusion and diversity. In G. Crimmins (Ed.), Strategies for supporting inclusion and diversity in the academy (pp. 379–399). Palgrave Macmillan, Cham. https://doi-org.proxy.bib. uottawa.ca/10.1007/ 978-3-030-43593-6_19

Crichlow, W. (2015). Critical Race Theory: A strategy for framing discussions around social justice and democratic education. Higher Education in Transformation Conference, Dublin, Ireland, 2015, 187-201. https://doi.org/10.21427/vq8w-v522

Dobbin, F., & Kalev, A. (2018). Why doesn’t diversity training work? The challenge for industry and academia. Anthropology Now, 10(2), 48–55. https://doi.org/10.1080/19428200.2018.1493182

Dover, T. L., Major, B., & Kaiser, C. R. (2016). Members of high-status groups are threatened by pro-diversity organizational messages. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 62, 58–67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jesp.2015.10.006

Employment Equity Act, S. C. 1995, c. 44. http://laws-lois.justice.gc.ca/eng/acts/e-5.401/

Ferdman, B. M., Prime, J., & Riggio, R. E. (Eds). (2020). Inclusive leadership: Transforming diverse lives, workplaces, and societies. New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780429449673

Henry, F., James, C., Li, P. S., Kobayashi, A., Smith, M. S., Ramos, H., & Enakshi, D. (2017). The equity myth: Racialization and indigeneity at Canadian universities. UBC Press.

Moss, G. (2019). Inclusive leadership (1st ed.). London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315108575

Moss-Racusin, C. A., van der Toorn, J., Dovidio, J. F., Brescoll, V. L., Graham, M. J., & Handelsman, J. (2014, February 7). Scientific diversity interventions. Science (New Series), 343(6171), 615-616. https://www.jstor.org/stable/24742956

National Academies of Science. (2020). 157th Annual Meeting, Attracting and Retaining a Diverse Workforce: Context Can Build Trust. Retrieved August 28, 2022, from http://www.nasonline.org/about-nas/events/annual-meeting/nas157/science-sessions-diversity.html

National Science Foundation. (2021). ADVANCE Program. Retrieved July 18, 2021, from https://www.nsf.gov/funding/pgm_summ.jsp?pims_id=5383

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council. (2021a). Dimensions Program. Retrieved July 18, 2021, from https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/NSERC-CRSNG/EDI-EDI/Dimensions-Program_Programme-Dimensions_eng.asp

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council. (2021b, April 14). Tri-Agency Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Action Plan for 2018-2025. https://www.nserc-crsng.gc.ca/NSERC-CRSNG/EDI-EDI/Action-Plan_Plan-dAction_eng.asp

Noon, M. (2017). Pointless diversity training: Unconscious bias, new racism and agency. Work, Employment and Society, 32(1), 198–209. https://doi.org/10.1177/0950017017719841

O'Meara, K. A., & Stromquist, N. P. (2015). Faculty peer networks: Role and relevance in advancing agency and gender equity. Gender and Education, 27(3), 338–358. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2015.1027668.

O’Meara, K. A., Lennartz, C. J., Kuvaeva, A., Jaeger, A., & Misra, J. (2019). Department conditions and practices associated with faculty workload satisfaction and perceptions of equity. The Journal of Higher Education (Columbus), 90(5), 744–772. https://doi.org/10.1080/00221546.2019.1584025

Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie. (2018). Observatoire de la langue française de l’Organisation internationale de la Francophonie, 2018. http://observatoire. francophonie.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/09/Francophones-Statistiques-par-pays.pdf

Payne, D. (2021, March 31). Calls for culture change as “them versus us” mindset drives rift between academic and non-academic staff. Nature Index News. https://www.nature.com/nature-index/news-blog/calls-culture-change-them-versus-us-drives-rift-between-academics-administrators-research-science

Peters, D. (2022, May 26). Universities are ramping up targeted hiring to meet CRC equity goals. University Affairs. https://www.universityaffairs.ca/news/news-article/universities-are-ramping-up-targeted-hiring-to-meet-crc-equity-goals/

Reardon, S. (2021). ‘We’re problem solvers’: Research administrators offer guidance to working scientists. Nature, 595, 321-322. https://doi.org/10.1038/d41586-021-01829

Stefani, L., & Blessinger, P. (2018). Essay. In Inclusive leadership in higher education: International perspectives and approaches (pp. 1–13). New York: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315466095

University of Ottawa. (2019). uOttawa Canada Research Chairs Equity, Diversity and Inclusion Action Plan, September 27, 2019. Reproduced with permission. https://research. uottawa.ca/sites/research.uottawa.ca/files/action-plan-edi-rev2019.pdf

University of Ottawa. (2021). Equity, diversity and inclusion in research: Continuing our journey. Report for the Vice-President, Research and Innovation, October 14, 2021. Reproduced with permission. https://www2.uottawa.ca/research-innovation/sites/g/files/bhrskd326/files/2022-02/OVPRI-EDI-research-action-plan.pdf.

Valantine, H. A., & Collins, F. S. (2015). National Institutes of Health addresses the science of diversity. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 112(40), 12240–12242. https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1515612112

Virginia Technical Institute. (2010). AdvanceVT final Report September 2003 – August 2010. National Science Foundation, Cooperative Agreement HRD-0244916. Retrieved July 27, 2021 from https://vtechworks.lib.vt.edu/bitstream/handle/10919/71801/AdvanceVT%20Final%20Report%20all%20113010.pdf. 

ANNEX

Canada Research Chairs Institutional Equity, Diversity, Inclusion Action Plan, 2017-2019
University of Ottawa
Revised September 27th, 2019

UOttawa’s Canada Research Chairs Equity Mission Statement

Objective #1: Increase representation of the four designated groups (FDGs) amongst CRCs.

Objective #2: Incorporate EDI in recruitment and selection processes.

Objective #3: Develop EDI data collection and reporting.

Objective #4: Strengthen institutional commitment to EDI.

Reproduced with permission from the Vice-President, Research and Innovation, University of Ottawa.