The Social Drivers of Inclusive Workplaces scale: a preliminary validation of the questionnaire

• Date: 09 November 2023
• Pages: 610-631
• DOI: https://doi.org/10.1108/EDI-01-2023-0022
• Published date: 09 November 2023
• Author: Ferdinando Paolo Santarpia,Valentina Sommovigo,Laura Borgogni

The Social Drivers of Inclusive

Workplaces scale: a preliminary

validation of the questionnaire

Ferdinando Paolo Santarpia, Valentina Sommovigo and

Laura Borgogni

Department of Psychology, Sapienza University of Rome, Rome, Italy

Abstract

Purpose –Drawing on Shore and colleagues’model of inclusive workplaces (2018) and the perceptions of

social context framework (Borgogni et al., 2010), this study aims to develop and provide a preliminary

validation of the Social Drivers of Inclusive Workplaces (SDIW) scale.

Design/methodology/approach –Using inductive and deductive approaches, items were developed. The

resulting pool of 28 items was administrated to 1,244 employees using an anonymous online survey. The factor

structure of the SDIW scale was tested through exploratory factor analysis (EFA) and confirmatory factor

analysis (CFA). Reliabilities were estimated. Alternative models were tested through CFAs. Nomological

validity and measurement invariance across gender were explored.

Findings –The EFA revealed a three-factor structure, including inclusive colleagues, supervisors and top

management. This solution was confirmed by the CFA and outperformed all alternative models, showing good

reliabilities. Measurement invariance across gender was confirmed. Correlations indicated that the SDIW total

score and each dimension were positively associated with belongingness needs satisfaction and affective

commitment, while negatively related to interpersonal strain, negative acts and turnover intention.

Practical implications –This study provides practitioners with a reliable tool to map social drivers of

inclusion within workplaces in order to design tailored interventions.

Originality/value –This study contributes to the inclusion literature, as it is the first to provide a scale that

simultaneously measures employees’perceptions of inclusive behaviours enacted by the three main social

actors within the workplace.

Keywords Inclusive workplaces, Diversity, Validation, Perceptions of social context

Paper type Research paper

Introduction

Organisations are increasingly aware that diversity and inclusion (D&I) are key sources of

competitive advantage. Growing evidence supports that workplace inclusion (“the extent to

which employees feel valued for who they are, the skills and experience they bring and the

extent to which they have a strong sense of belonging with others at work”,ILO, 2022, p. 28)

brings numerous benefits, such as increased organisational commitment (Brimhall et al.,

2017), psychological needs satisfaction (Paolillo et al., 2021), lower levels of turnover (Panicker

and Sharma, 2020), less exhaustion (Behnke et al., 2022) and fewer negative acts at work (Luo

et al., 2022). As the role of workplace inclusion in channelling diversity (i.e. the diverse

composition of the workforce) into positive organisational outcomes has become

progressively recognised (Hewlett et al., 2013), leaders report that setting goals and

tracking D&I progress using reliable measurements is one of their top priorities (Gartner,

2019). Nevertheless, “inclusion remains the most difficult metric to track”(Romansky et al.,

2021), making benchmarking hardly feasible as each company tends to use its own set of

items to detect diverse aspects of inclusion (IMS, 2022). Selecting appropriate workplace

inclusion scales is then crucial to identifying the critical factors that facilitate (versus hinder)

inclusion and tracking progress against inclusion objectives (Gartner, 2019).

In academic investigations and the business world, inclusion has been commonly

measured by asking employees to express their perceptions of a wide range of specific

EDI

43,4

610

The current issue and full text archive of this journal is available on Emerald Insight at:

https://www.emerald.com/insight/2040-7149.htm

Received 19 January 2023

Revised 1 August 2023

Accepted 12 October 2023

Equality, Diversity and Inclusion:

An International Journal

Vol. 43 No. 4, 2024

pp. 610-631

© Emerald Publishing Limited

2040-7149

DOI 10.1108/EDI-01-2023-0022

components of inclusion (IMS, 2022). More specifically, several inclusion scales have been

developed to specifically assess employee’s perception of inclusion within the workgroup

(Chung et al., 2020) or the inclusiveness of one’s immediate supervisor (Shore and Chung,

2022). Some of these scales evaluate inclusive behaviours enacted by colleagues toward

specific categories of diversity or actions taken by supervisors to facilitate the integration of

diversities (Ashikali et al., 2021). Conversely, there are poor tools available to measure

inclusive practices implemented by top management (Li, 2021).

Overall, most of these measurements were not analysed for validity or reliability (Rezai

et al., 2020) and focused on a single organisational social source or foci (e.g. workgroup). One

exception to this is the Mor Barak Inclusion-Exclusion Scale (MBIE; Mor Barak, 2017), which

has been the scale most used in published studies (Rezai et al., 2020). To the best of our

knowledge, the MBIE represents the only validated reliable instrument that allows

evaluating inclusion not only for the workgroup but also for the supervisor and the higher

management (Rezai et al., 2020). However, the MBIE is limited to measuring inclusion as the

extent to which employees feel part of the critical organisational processes, namely access to

information, involvement/participation and ability to influence decision-making processes

(Mor Barak, 2017). Although the MBIE examines these dimensions of inclusion at five system

levels (i.e. the overall organisation, workgroup, supervisor, higher management and social/

informal levels), this scale focuses on accessibility to the resources and participation within

the work context, while excluding several other aspects of inclusion (e.g. feeling safe and

being recognised as unique; Shore et al., 2018). To fill this gap, the present study aims to

provide a scale that offers a complete overview of the inclusive behaviours enacted by

colleagues, supervisors and top management toward diversity in the workplace.

Although inclusion is an increasing area of research, a clear set of inclusion-related

constructs is still lacking, which limits empirical testing (Jackson and Joshi, 2011) and

generates the need for more theoretical grounding (Chung et al., 2020). To address these

challenges, Shore et al. (2018) proposed a model of inclusive workplaces. This model states

that an inclusive company is one wherein the inclusion practices and processes are

consistently shown at all organisational levels, including the top management (i.e. by

implementing inclusion practices and processes), workgroup and supervisor (i.e. by shaping

individuals’perceptions of the balance between belongingness and uniqueness). Based on

this model and the well-recognised role of context in shaping individual perceptions (Johns,

2006), we argue that inclusion is about the degree to which the employee perceives that one’s

workplace is inclusive. In this regard, a recent study has revealed that employees attribute

most inclusion/exclusion experiences to the top management, workgroup and supervisor

(Gaudiano, 2021), suggesting that these three social actors drive inclusion experiences. This

fits perfectly with the “Perceptions of Social Context”(PoSC) framework (Borgogni et al.,

2010) which posits that employees’perceptions of behaviours enacted by these three social

constituents are key to shaping their interpretation of the organisational context. This

framework has been recently operationalised in a way that provides a reliable methodological

approach for assessing these perceptions (Borgogni et al., 2023). Thus, this study aims to

provide a theory-based instrument founded on the integration of the model of inclusive

workplaces (Shore et al., 2018) with the PoSC literature (Borgogni et al., 2010). To this end, this

study aims to develop and preliminarily validate a measure that assesses inclusive

behaviours enacted by colleagues, supervisors and top management, namely the Social

Drivers of Inclusive Workplaces (SDIW).

The importance of perceptions of social context

Scholars have increasingly acknowledged the key role of the organisational context in

shaping individual work behaviours (Johns, 2006). Hence, investigating how employees

Social Drivers

of Inclusive

Workplaces

scale

611