Organizations striving for diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) increasingly depend on data-driven approaches to measure progress and build equity-focused business cases, yet flawed self-identification processes hinder these efforts. The structure of voluntary self-identification (VSI) questions on job applications presents a significant gap: individuals who identify as Hispanic/Latino are often unable to simultaneously select their race. This leads to identity erasure, particularly for intersectional identities such as Afro-Latinos, and compromises the accuracy of DEI data collection, ultimately weakening efforts to achieve inclusivity and equity.
Identity as the Foundation for DEI Success
Understanding identity, which is foundational to advancing diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) within organizations, is critical to addressing flaws in data collection processes that hinder meaningful progress. However, many DEI efforts fall short due to flawed data collection processes, particularly in voluntary self-identification (VSI) sections of job applications. Identity encompasses both race and ethnicity, but misunderstanding or conflating the two creates limited and inaccurate datasets, as noted earlier in the flawed self-identification processes within job applications. This not only harms individuals’ ability to express their full identity but also undermines companies’ ability to track progress, build their DEI business case, and implement meaningful strategies.One significant issue lies in how self-identification questions force applicants who select “Hispanic/Latino” to forgo identifying their race. Organizations must reassess their application processes, embrace a nuanced understanding of identity, and restructure their VSI frameworks to capture accurate and holistic data. These efforts, introduced here, set the stage for a more inclusive, equitable approach to DEI.
Race vs. Ethnicity: Clarifying Misconceptions
Race and ethnicity are distinct yet interconnected aspects of identity. Race often refers to physical characteristics, such as skin color or ancestry, while ethnicity relates to cultural markers, such as language, traditions, and shared heritage. For example, someone can identify as both Black (race) and Hispanic/Latino (ethnicity)—a reality for many Afro-Latinos throughout Latin America and the Caribbean.The current practice of excluding race identification for individuals who select Hispanic/Latino as their ethnicity is rooted in outdated and oversimplified categorizations. Historically, racial categories were developed through a limited lens that failed to reflect the complexity of human identity. This has led to a misunderstanding of how ethnicity and race intersect, resulting in application processes that fail to accommodate nuanced identities. For Afro-Latinos, this means being forced to choose between expressing their ethnicity or their racial identity, effectively erasing part of who they are.
The Flawed Design of Voluntary Self-Identification Questions
Many job application systems require applicants to answer ethnicity and race questions sequentially, with a “Yes” selection for Hispanic/Latino blocking the ability to select any race category. This binary approach fails to capture the full picture of an individual’s identity. It is harmful in several ways:
Erasure of Intersectional Identities
Afro-Latinos and others with complex racial and ethnic identities are forced into categories that do not fully represent them, perpetuating a sense of exclusion.
This exclusion undermines individuals’ ability to feel seen and valued during the hiring process.
Inaccurate DEI Data
Organizations striving to measure progress in racial diversity may inadvertently undercount Black employees who also identify as Hispanic/Latino.
By conflating race and ethnicity, companies produce datasets that misrepresent the diversity within their workforce.
Flawed Business Cases for DEI
Without accurate data, companies struggle to build compelling business cases for DEI initiatives or track the effectiveness of their strategies.
Misaligned self-identification processes hinder companies’ ability to understand and meet the needs of their workforce.
Recommendations for Reassessing and Restructuring the VSI Process
Audit and revise your process, partner with employees and experts, and consider actionable steps to make the process more inclusive and effective. Some actions may include:
Allow Independent Selection of Race and Ethnicity
Decouple ethnicity and race questions so that selecting “Yes” for Hispanic/Latino does not prevent applicants from also selecting a race category.
Provide an option for multiracial identities or “Other” with a text field for self-description.
Educate HR Professionals and Leaders
Train teams on the differences between race and ethnicity and the importance of intersectional data in DEI efforts.
Share insights on how inclusive data collection contributes to a more accurate understanding of organizational demographics.
Improve Data Utilization
Analyze self-identification data holistically to better understand workforce demographics.
Use disaggregated data to track the representation and experiences of specific groups, such as Afro-Latinos.
Moving Toward Equity in Identity Representation
The current approach to voluntary self-identification reflects a lack of understanding about the interplay between race and ethnicity, perpetuating harmful practices that erase intersectional identities. By decoupling race and ethnicity questions, educating HR teams, and restructuring application processes, organizations can better align their DEI efforts with the realities of identity. Accurate and inclusive data collection is not just a logistical issue—it is a moral imperative for organizations committed to fostering environments where everyone can thrive.
To truly advance DEI, we must first address how we define and measure diversity, beginning with voluntary self-identification. Only then can we build equitable workplaces that reflect the full spectrum of human experience.
Comments