Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion Action Plan

In 2017, the VPR and Provost & VPA established an Action Plan Working Group comprising the Assistant Vice-President (Faculty and Academic Staff Relations (FASR)) and staff from the Office of Research Services to develop the Action Plan in consultation with the Assistant Vice-President (Diversity and Human Rights (DHR)) and the CRC Advisory Committee. This Working Group was expanded in 2019 and now comprises: the Associate Vice-President (Research Services) (Karina McInnis); Assistant Vice-President (DHR) Indira Naidoo-Harris); Assistant Vice-President (FASR) (Laurie Arnott); Manager, Strategic Research Programs (Ailsa Fullwood); and, faculty representatives (Leanne Son Hing (Associate Professor, Psychology), Medhat Moussa (Professor, Engineering)); and a CRC chairholder Aicheng Chen (Professor, Chemistry).

The 2017 development of the Action Plan took place in the context of the following three major related activities, which had either just concluded or were underway:

  1. The University of Guelph Diversity Matters Census - Employment Equity Report 2015/16
  2. Employment Equity Plan (2017-2021) (an outcome of the above 2015/16 report)
  3. University of Guelph Inclusion Framework (2017)

The Assistant VP (FASR) and the Assistant VP (DHR) had each played key roles in these three major initiatives and were instrumental in developing the CRC EDI Action Plan.  As such, these prior initiatives informed development of the Action Plan—shaping its philosophy and, in some cases, providing its specific activities and/or indicators. They also influenced the Action Plan’s scope.

In 2017, the University’s capacity for undertaking additional institutional analysis was not available.  For this reason, the 2017-19 CRC EDI Action Plan identifies “consultation with chairholders” and “comparative review” as actions.  The analyses of the results of the consultation and comparative review will inform development of the 2020-2025 CRC EDI Action Plan.   

To develop the 2017-19 CRC EDI Action Plan, the Working Group consulted:

In addition to consulting these important sources of institutional knowledge and stakeholder engagement, the Working Group also conducted an analysis of the existing CRC policies and procedures, taking into account what its members had learned from participating in the above three endeavours.

Objectives have been revised for clarity in response to the CRC EDI Action Plan review in 2019, and to take into account the considerable work that has happened across the University since 2016. This includes progress on the EEP (as described below) and the 2019 Diversity Census.

The Vice-President (Research) is responsible for meeting the goals and objectives of the CRC EDI Action Plan in consultation with the Provost & Vice-President (Academic).

GOAL: Position the University of Guelph to attract and retain the best scholars and researchers from Canada and internationally to its CRC program

Indicators:

  1. Exceed the CRC target for Aboriginal Peoples (n>0)
  2. Meet or exceed CRC target for members of Visible Minorities (n>=4)
  3. Meet or exceed CRC target for persons with disabilities (n>=1)

Actions:

  1. Require that chairs used for retention follow the same process as chairs used for recruitment; i.e. constitute a selection committee, advertise the position, and conduct a faculty search that complies with the Collective Agreement policies (Responsible: FASR)
  2. Require all selection committees (whether for internal or external chairs) to complete training in Implicit Bias (as per Collective Agreement) (Responsible: FASR)
  3. Selectively use targeted recruitment to address gaps in accordance with the University’s CRC policy (Responsible: Provost)
  4. Employ an outreach strategy to expand the candidate pool (HR, DHR, FASR) (in alignment with the EEP Goal 2.1)
  5. Develop hiring rubrics that support fairness in hiring practices (FASR) (in alignment with EEP Goal 2.1)

Analysis:

A total of 5 CRCs will made available by December 2019:  four Tier 2 CRCs and one Tier 1 CRC. (Numbers have been updated since the 2017 re-allocation exercise and the 2018 announcement of new Tier 2 CRCs).

Women: The University of Guelph is exceeding the institutional target set by CRC Program for recruitment of women (target = 9; current active = 11).  The University of Guelph 2014 Diversity Matters Census shows no gap in employment for women in the faculty/professional group.  Given the gap analysis it seems reasonable to expect that the university can maintain these numbers. 

Visible Minorities: The University is below its CRC Program target for members of Visible Minorities (target = 4). The 2014 Diversity Matters Census shows that there are gaps for Visible Minorities/Racialized Peoples. In accordance with its CRC policies and Employment Equity plans, the University may use targeted recruitment to meet this target.

Indigenous People:  The University is meeting the CRC Program institutional target for Aboriginal Peoples (target = 0), but intends to exceed this target by at least one.  The 2014 census shows that Aboriginal People are mainly under-represented in academics. The University has taken steps to correct this under-representation by recruiting five new Aboriginal professors across the disciplines.  In accordance with its CRC policies and Employment Equity plans, the University may use targeted recruitment to meet this target.

Persons with Disabilities: The University has not met the CRC Program target for persons with disabilities (target = 1).  The census data show no employment gap in persons with disabilities. However, because this is still a very small proportion of the total number of faculty, it is uncertain whether a CRC could be filled internally. The University will prioritize internal candidates prior to initiating an external, targeted search.

Employment Systems Review: The 2014 Diversity Matters Census, the Employment Equity identified gaps in equity groups across employee groups (as indicated above)  Following consultation with stakeholders, the Employment Equity Committee established a series of goals, including the goal “to develop and implement special measures to attract and hire a workforce that is representative of equity groups”  (EEP Goal 2.1) To accomplish, the university committed to actions including “employ an outreach strategy to expand the candidate pool” and “review and further develop/enhance available tools supporting fair and equitable hiring practices for staff positions.” Resources (primarily from FASR) were assigned to achieving these objectives upon which the CRC program can build.

Environmental Scan: FASR and ORS reviewed the University’s CRC policies and procedures against new CRC requirements and the Collective Agreement.  They identified that when chairs were used for retention, selection processes were not open or transparent.  This difference in process, coupled with the institution’s history of regularly using chairs for retention, was limiting the University’s ability to attract a diverse pool of applicants to a CRC position.

Since 2016, the EEP has resulted in programs and activities relevant to the University’s management of its CRC allocation.  For example, as detailed in the 2019 EEP Progress Report:

  • The Provost and the Associate Vice-President (Human Resources) initiated the GenEq program to help advance the status of women at the University.
  • Employment equity outcomes are included in performance objectives for all leaders.
  • A governance structure has been developed to align mandates with the Inclusion Framework.
  • Targeted recruitment of 6 Aboriginal Faculty was completed.
  • Equitek subscription was secured and is now being implemented for use to reach an even more diverse prospective applicant pool.
  • Pilot test of a tool to improve tracking of the diversity of applicant pools for faculty and sessionals was successful.
  • Efforts to review and enhance the pre-tenure faculty mentorship program are ongoing.
  • Salary Anomaly review has been completed.  Effective June 1, 2018, all full-time faculty members who identified as women or as non-male received an across-the-board increase of $2,050.
  • Unconscious bias training was added to existing Diversity and Human Rights training for all faculty, sessional lecturer and staff search committees and an online module “Minimizing Implicit Bias in the Search and Recruitment Process” was created.
  • The University entered into a partnership with Canadian Centre for Diversity and Inclusion (CCDI) to enhance resources to support hiring, retention and education.
  • The University completed a review of the process to identify potential systemic barriers and provide necessary resources to departments required to invest considerable funds to accommodate persons with disabilities.

Indicators:

  1. Beginning in December 2017, all CRC postings are posted on the Faculty Opportunities page in compliance with CRC requirements.
  2. Beginning in 2017, the CRC utilization spreadsheet is available online in compliance with CRC requirements.
  3. By January 2018, every nomination is reviewed by an Advisory Committee (which includes an equity expert) for its compliance with University and CRC nomination and recruitment requirements.
  4. By January 2019, accountability for EDI is embedded in tools for recruitment (Request to Advertise and Request to Negotiate).
  5. The University’s CRC Policies address identified issues related to transparency and accountability.
  6. By December 2019, governance structure for oversight of EDI in the research enterprise is in place.

Actions:

  1. Revise the University of Guelph Policies for Management of Canada Research Chairs Allocation to improve transparency and accountability at each stage of allocation, nomination, recruitment whether a chair is used for retention or recruitment (Responsible: ORS and FASR):
    1. Revise an internal allocation policy to ensure that EDI is included in criteria.
    2. Require that the Dean attest to the openness, transparency, and equity of the selection process.
    3. Develop more transparent processes for allocating chairs to colleges and use of chairs for emergency recruitment.
  2. Align standard operating procedures with policy; communicate and implement these procedures consistently (Responsible: ORS):
    1. Incorporate explicit language on all job postings related to eligible leaves and the effect of these leaves on productivity (Responsible FASR).
    2. Develop a flow chart that clearly maps steps in the nomination process.
  3. Institute a governance structure for improved oversight of EDI within the CRC program and within the larger research enterprise. (Responsible: Provost & VPA and VPR):
    1. Establish a CRC Advisory Committee to review recommendations and attest to the openness and transparency of the search and recruitment process.
    2. Develop a body responsible for oversight of EDI in the research enterprise.

Analysis:

Environmental scan: The CRC EDI Action Plan Working Group consulted the Inclusion Framework for guidance on aligning its work with ongoing EDI efforts at the University.  Prior to development of the Inclusion Framework in 2017, the University’s many EDI initiatives were not coordinated.  The Inclusion Framework was the result of five years of consultation with stakeholders across the University. It identified that making inclusion a priority requires commitment from leadership.  Therefore, its recommendations included the establishment of two new committees dedicated to guiding and supporting the University’s inclusion efforts, the first of which would report directly to the University’s executive leadership group.

The first of these, the Inclusive University Committee (IUC), is an advisory committee to the AVP Diversity and Human Rights that reports to the executive leadership group. In keeping with the University’s strategic priorities, IUC is responsible for coordinating all inclusion goals and priorities across the University of Guelph campuses as identified by committees such as the Human Rights Advisory Group, Accessibility, Employment Equity and Academic Inclusion Committees. See Inclusion Framework governance structure.

The Working Group identified that the Inclusion Committee could provide a structural framework within which EDI activities and initiatives related to the CRC program and the broader research enterprise might be integrated. However, given the intensity of activity related to EDI initiatives and the dispersion of resources across these initiatives, it also identified that an appropriate governance structure specific to the CRC Action Plan may take time to establish and resource.  The VPR charged the AVP (Research Services) with developing, in consultation with the AVP (DHR), a governance structure that would ensure alignment of the research enterprise EDI initiatives with the University’s overarching Inclusion Framework.

In addition to consulting the Inclusion Framework, the Working Group reviewed FASR’s recruitment processes and the University’s CRC policy.  It found that many of FASR tools and processes support equitable and transparent search and recruitment. (See full Environmental Scan under header below) However, it also identified opportunities to improve clarity of job postings and to enhance transparency at key decision points, from allocation to nomination. This analysis motivated development of actions focused on policy and procedures.

Indicators:

  1. Areas of inequity in compensation and other supports are identified (by December 2018).
  2. Results of the consultation with chairholders are shared with the Provost & VPA and the VPR.
  3. Trial of method for ongoing systematic data collection is complete.

Actions:

  1. Conduct comparative review of supports for CRCs (Responsible: ORS).
  2. Engage chairholders in consultation on their experience of inclusion within the CRC program and the university (Responsible: DHR, ORS).
  3. Engage scholars with expertise in diversity and inclusion to develop a systematic method for assessing the inclusion climate within the University’s research enterprise that can be implemented on a bi-annual basis (Responsible: ORS).

In partial fulfilment of this Action Plan’s objectives, the University conducted a comparative review of institutional financial support provided to the University’s active men and women chairholders in Fall 2018. The numbers of individuals from the other three groups was considered not significant enough to compare.  The exercise revealed a gap in data systems; i.e. current systems do not permit tracking of actual institutional support. The data was therefore drawn from nomination/renewal forms. The University has initiated planning to address this gap. 

Key Findings

  1. There are more men in Tier 1 positions than women; and 36% of Tier 1 Chairs are women; 64% are men.  By contrast, there are more women in Tier 2 positions than men: 53% are women and 47% are men.
  2. The average annual salary of Tier 1 women is $265,572 which is lower than the average salary of Tier 1 men who earn $278,609 .  By contrast, the average annual salary of Tier 2 women is $190,555 which is marginally higher than the average salary of Tier 2 men who earn $185,137.
  3. The distribution of genders by funding agencies is imbalanced. The ratios of female:male chairs per funding agency are: CIHR 1:3, NSERC 6:9 and SSHRC 5:2
  4. All current chairholders receive a reduced teaching load.

In 2018, the Office of Research Services asked three chairholders and another faculty member with expertise in qualitative research and equity issues how the University should best conduct its consultation with chairholders.  These chairholders identified that an anonymized survey followed by interviews or focus groups would provide the most reliable data, and they emphasized that the University should hire an external consultant for reasons of confidentiality. 

The University solicited responses from 47 past and present chairholders to its Diversity Matters Survey and 24 chairholders responded (response rate: 51%). The University also, invited chairholders to respond to the final qualitative question with feedback on the CRC program specifically.  Comments revealed a wide range of experiences and perceptions of equity and inclusion. While some commend the University for its efforts to build an inclusive environment, others point to “obvious and subtle barriers and biases” and the low number of faculty members who are members of visible minorities. 

In 2019, the University hired an independent consulting group with expertise in diversity to engage chairholders in discussion about their experience of the CRC program at the University of Guelph.  Twenty-two current and past CRCs participated in this research. Participation occurred via personal interviews (17), a focus group (3) and emailed questions (2). The Executive Summary from the consultant's final report is below.

Executive Summary

Most CRCs felt that their expectations of the CRC program had been met. In fact, several CRCs reported many positive benefits of being a CRC, and that this recognition has been transformative for their careers.  However, respondents argued that the coherence of onboarding support could be enhanced, and reported perceived funding discrepancies. They also discussed the importance of proactive communication when CRC appointments are ending or coming up for renewal as ways to promote retention.

In terms of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI), some male CRCs indicated their belief that recent CRC hires have helped to achieve an adequate level of diversity. Although female CRCs did not report any blatant experiences of exclusion, they did report experiencing exclusion and subtle comments from other colleagues questioning the merits of their having been hired, and some showed the weight of self-doubt and stress because of these questions. The interviews showed that there is no single “CRC experience”, and emphasized the value of tailored financial, leadership and social support to help CRCs succeed.

CRCs also highlighted a need for clear communication about the CRC program, what it is intended to achieve, and how it fits into the strategic vision of the University of Guelph. Communicating clearly about how each CRC research area fits into this strategic vision would help to align expectations and priorities and ensure that the valuable contributions of all scholars can be readily understood. Several CRCs also indicated a wish to have greater recognition and appreciation for their high-quality research within the University, both formally and informally. Similarly, CRCs also reflected a strong desire for their work to be widely and frequently shared at both the community and global level, rather than “a well-kept secret”. This will require using social media and other forms of marketing to raise the current CRC profile.

Indicators:

  1. Number of Canada Research Chairs in research areas relevant to diversity, equity, and inclusion is increased by 2019 (for a total of three).
  2. Number of Canada Research Chairs in interdisciplinary and non-traditional research areas is increased by 2019 (for a total of three).
  3. All materials publicizing the University’s CRC policies, actions, postings, and appointments clearly express the value of diversity to research excellence.

Actions:

  1. Develop resources for researchers to embed EDI in recruitment and research design (ORS, DHR).
  2. Review communications publicizing the University’s CRC policies and EDI Action Plan to ensure that they express the importance of diversity to research excellence (Research Communications).
  3. Review communications publicizing CRC renewals and nominations to ensure that all emphasize merit and research excellence. (Research Communications).

Analysis:

The Working Group consulted with University experts in equity, including members of the newly constituted GenEq committee. Experts noted that recruiting chairs in areas relevant to EDI not only helps to recruit members of equity groups, it can also build the University’s capacity for thoughtful, research-informed discussion about diversity and equity across the research enterprise. It can diversify the questions posed, the methodologies and forms of dissemination. 2017 CRCs in such areas include the CRC in Gender, Justice and Development and the CRC in Care, Gender, and Relationships.

These experts further noted that if the University uses targeted recruitment to fill chairs and meet its equity targets, it will need to ensure that it simultaneously communicates its rationale clearly and transparently, i.e., that these measures are being taken to address systemic inequities (in compliance with Ontario Human Rights Legislation) and with the goal of advancing research excellence.

Consultation conducted by the DHR for creation of the Inclusion Framework showed that researchers and graduate students needed training in how to integrate EDI in their research programs. The Inclusion Framework includes “Training modules in integrating EDI principles in research programs” as an objective. The responsibility for delivering on this objective is shared between DHR and ORS. The Working Group considered this a relevant and important action to reiterate within the CRC EDI Action Plan.

To develop the first iteration of this Action Plan, the Working Group examined strategic plans, existing structures, and recruitment practices and policies relevant to the University’s CRC program.

The University’s 2017 Inclusion Framework, developed through a series of long-term community consultation processes and literature reviews, articulated priority actions to address the University of Guelph’s unique challenges. Most relevant to the University’s management of its CRC allocation are:

  • Develop and implement a strategy to increase access and support to traditionally underrepresented staff and faculty (Responsible: AVP HR, AVP-FASR and AVP- DHR in collaboration with the Employment Equity Committee).
  • Support researchers in realising inclusivity in the research enterprise by developing and delivering training and resources (Responsible: ORS).

The Inclusive University Committee ensures that the University’s multiple EDI initiatives and committees are integrated and coordinated. Committees include the Employment Equity Committee, the Human Rights Advisory Committee, and the President’s Advisory Committee on Aboriginal Initiatives. With the Inclusion Committee in place, there is now a conscious effort and plan to ensure a more integrated approach to EDI.  For example, reporting and recommendations arising from these committees (related to initiatives such as positive space, indigenization, and GenEq) are made to the University Executive. This integrated approach and sharing of recommendations and actions will provide the needed oversight required to ensure issues of intersectionality are understood and addressed.

FASR has a suite of tools and processes to support equitable and transparent search and recruitment of all faculty that are available to University of Guelph faculty and administrators at the FASR website. For example:

  • The Faculty Recruitment Checklist is intended to serve as a best practice guide to effective, fair and equitable recruitment and selection of new Faculty Members at the University.  The purpose of the guidelines is to ensure that selection processes are fair, welcoming of diversity, defensible and result in the best hiring decisions.
  • The Request to Advertise form is submitted by the Dean to FASR for the Provost’s approval. It requires the search committee be listed, and "To ensure the committee is reflective of the diversity of the University, the composition of the Search committee will include one or more representative members from the equity seeking groups." It also identifies that while FASR will post the position to usual outlets, hiring departments/ colleges are required to list other measures/outlets to ensure a diverse applicant pool.
  • The Request to Negotiate form is submitted by the Dean to FASR for Provost approval. This document is used by FASR to conduct a salary comparison to ensure fair remuneration. It includes the following:
    • number of applicants from the Applicant Tracking Data (provided Diversity & Human Rights);
    • justification of candidate ranking; and
    • salary range and justification, including salary comparators.

The Working Group identified that instituting rubrics, such as those used by HR for staff positions, would improve transparency and fairness in faculty selection processes. 

A review of the existing CRC Policy and practices by FASR and ORS found challenges in the following areas that were limiting the University’s ability to recruit and retain the best candidates:

  • Internal allocation of chairs: process of allocation was not separated from the process of nomination; i,e., an allocation was to a nominee, rather than to a college for the purpose of recruitment or retention. Criteria for allocation of chairs to colleges were not articulated or public.
  • Utilization: decisions regarding allocation and nomination were confidential.
  • Retention or recruitment: decision to use a chair for retention or recruitment were not public and the decision-making process was not explicit.
  • Over-reliance on chairs for retention: the University was often using chairs for retention which meant that selection processes were different and less transparent.

The University of Guelph Policies for Management of Canada Research Chairs Allocation outline open and transparent allocation, nomination and recruitment processes.  Key components are summarized below.

As detailed in the University CRC Policy (section 8) and in alignment with the Collective Agreement, the CRC recruitment policy includes safeguards at three points in the recruitment and nomination process to ensure open and transparent recruitment:

Advertise:

The search committee will submit to the FASR the standard Request to Advertise. Ads will include the date of posting, and will use inclusive, unbiased, and ungendered language, and will encourage applicants to identify strengths and experiences in increasing diversity in curriculum and/or their institutional environment. They will additionally acknowledge the potential impact that career interruptions can have on a candidate’s record of research achievement and encourage applicants to explain in their application the impact that career interruptions may have had on their record of research achievement. Tier 2 CRC advertisements must refer to the Tier 2 justification process, in accordance with CRC program expectations.  Both FASR and the ORS will review CRC position advertisements to ensure that they meet the CRC Program requirements for advertisements/ job postings.

Selection:

Upon conclusion of the search, the CRC search committee will make a final recommendation to the Dean accompanied by a full Request to Negotiate (as set out in the Guidelines on Faculty Recruitment) that must include a rationale when a member of an equity-seeking group is unsuccessful. This rationale should be approved by the committee member with equity expertise.

As per the collective agreement, the Dean will send the Request to Negotiate to FASR for salary comparison and to the Provost & VPA and the VPR for approval to nominate.

Nomination:

The VPR will send the recommendation and Request to Negotiate from the search committee to the CRC Advisory Committee for feedback in accordance with the committee’s terms of reference. The Provost & VPA and VPR will consider CRC Advisory Committee feedback before approving a candidate for nomination to the CRC. If the Provost & VPA and the VPR are not prepared to accept the recommendation for nomination, the Provost & VPA and the VPR may return the proposal to the originating department or school for reconsideration; or halt the selection process.

 The Provost & VPA and the VPR, in consultation with the Dean(s), make the decision to allocate a vacant CRC to a college and a general area of research to advance the University’s Strategic Research Plan (SRP). The Provost & VPA and the VPR will solicit proposals (1-3 pages) from the Deans for CRC allocations, within 12 months of the targeted nomination date. Criteria for evaluation of allocation proposals are detailed in the University’s CRC policy. 

Once a CRC is allocated to a college, the recruitment process will meet recruitment requirements outlined in the Collective Agreement and the Canada Research Chairs Program’s Requirements for recruiting and nominating Canada Research Chairs, as detailed in the University of Guelph Policies for Management of Canada Research Chairs Allocation.

The Provost & VPA and the VPR may decide to use the corridor of flexibility in order to enable the University to meet its equity targets (e.g., by splitting a Tier 1 Chair into two Tier 2 Chairs), or to build capacity in a strategic research area (e.g., by converting from one Tri-agency to another).

The Provost & VPA and VPR will decide whether to commence the renewal process or to instead fill the CRC through the recruitment and nomination process. 

The CRC Advisory Committee will review requests for CRC renewals and provide the Provost & VPA and VPR with feedback in accordance with the Committee’s terms of reference. 

When determining whether to approve a request for renewal, the Provost & VPA and the VPR will review requests for CRC renewals, taking into account the following considerations: 

  1. Performance of the CRC in the previous term, based on the draft CRC performance report;
  2. Importance of the CRC renewal to the nominating unit’s and college’s research goals;
  3. Support available to the CRC from the unit and the college;
  4. Alignment of the proposed renewal with the University’s strategic directions and University of Guelph’s Strategic Research Plan;
  5. Budget implications for the college, should it not be approved for renewal;
  6. Contribution to fulfilling the CRC Program equity, diversity and inclusion targets for the University; and
  7. an Equity, Diversity and Inclusion (EDI) plan and measures for the entire proposed Chair program, i.e., in the conduct of the research, the recruitment of graduate students and others.

For the request to be approved for a renewal nomination, the following conditions must be met:

  1. satisfactorily meet the criteria listed above;
  2. satisfactorily fit with University of Guelph’s Strategic Research Plan; and
  3. receive recommendation by the CRC Advisory Committee.

If the request for renewal does not meet these conditions, it will be treated as a vacancy for consideration as a new allocation.

The University will not advance individuals from a Tier 2 chair to a Tier 1 Chair.

In the case where the institution loses a chair due to the re-allocation process, the Provost & VPA and the VPR will decide which chair(s) will be phased-out. Criteria included in decisions include timing (where possible, chairs nearest their ends of term will be selected for phase-out) and consideration of EDI targets. The VPR will communicate decisions to Deans.

As per the collective agreement, the Dean will send the Request to Negotiate to (FASR) for review of requested salary against comparators, equity and data from the Applicant Tracking Questionnaire, and Labour Market Impact Assessment (if required). This review ensures that individuals from the FDGs are not disadvantaged in negotiations related to the level of salary and benefits.

The Dean reviews the search process, the short-list, and the recommendation detailed in the Request to Negotiate.  If satisfied, the Dean will sign a form attesting that the committee has met employment equity requirements, including recognition that leaves can contribute to a career slowdown.

All members of search committees are required to complete training in recognizing bias; this may be provided via the Tri-agency Institutional Programs Secretariat unconscious bias training module or via the University of Guelph Office Minimizing Implicit Bias in the Search Process training module.

The University of Guelph is committed to correct the conditions of disadvantage in employment experienced by women, aboriginal peoples, persons with disabilities and members of visible minorities/Visible Minorities. The University recognizes that there are additional communities who may experience barriers in employment. 

All faculty applicants are invited to self-identify within their applications or through an Applicant Tracking Questionnaire (see pdf version). The faculty recruitment page, which lists open CRC positions, encourages individuals to self-identify as a member of the FDG:    

"At the University of Guelph, fostering a culture of inclusion institutional imperative. The University invites and encourages applications from all qualified individuals, including from groups that are traditionally underrepresented in employment, who may contribute to further diversification of our Institution. We encourage members of equity- and diversity-seeking groups to self-identify within their letter of intent in their application or through the Applicant Tracking Questionnaire. The University of Guelph acknowledges the potential impact that career interruptions can have on a candidate’s record of research achievement and encourages applicants to explain in their application the impact that career interruptions may have had on their record of research achievement."

DHR collects and protects data on the four designated groups (both applicants to CRC positions and successful candidates) by administering this confidential questionnaire.    

The University is committed to providing a supportive and inclusive workplace for all students, staff, and faculty, including CRC chairholders. It has established Equity and Inclusion Procedures, which support the University’s Human Rights Policies and Procedures. These policies and procedures are overseen and monitored by the Office of Diversity and Human Rights (DHR).

DHR receives and addresses human rights complaints from staff, students, and faculty, including chairholders. DHR follows an alternate dispute resolution process to resolve most concerns.  Formal complaints are reported to the Assistant Vice-President, Diversity & Human Rights.

DHR monitors the University’s diversity climate by administering the confidential Diversity Matters Census. All of the information collected is kept confidential in the Office of Diversity and Human Rights (DHR) and completely separate from employee personnel files. The survey provides the University information needed “to set realistic and achievable diversity and inclusion goals.”