Developing strategies to improve the sense of belonging and mitigate tokenism

Despite the increase in DEI initiatives and the rising social awareness, diversity, equity, and inclusiveness are still scarce in many work environments. In the process of implementing a diverse group in the workplace and training programs, retention efforts should always follow recruitment strategies; it is crucial to establish an environment that offers recruited women and minorities a sense of belonging and inclusiveness. Literature shows that diversity and belonging benefit not only the individual, but also the organization, society, and health care system. Many strategies to foster a sense of belonging in the workplace have been suggested, including, but not limited to, mentorship, sponsorship, affinity groups, dashboards, and surveys. Leaderships should acknowledge DEI initiatives, promoting efforts to enhance inclusiveness and mitigate tokenism. Amid DEI criticism and backlash, it is important to continue to promote education and positive discussions and aim for cultural changes targeting rooted systemic racism and discrimination, which continue to impose an obstacle to DEIB achievements.

Reflections on patient engagement by patient partners: how it can go wrong

As six patient partners in Canada, we aim to contribute to learning and to provide an opportunity to reflect on patient engagement (PE) in research and healthcare environments. Patient engagement refers to "meaningful and active collaboration in governance, priority setting, conducting research and knowledge translation" with patient partners as members of teams, rather than participants in research or clinical care. While much has been written about the benefits of patient engagement, it is important to accurately document and share what we term 'patient engagement gone wrong.' These examples have been anonymized and presented as four statements: patient partners as a check mark, unconscious bias towards patient partners, lack of support to fully include patient partners, and lack of recognizing the vulnerability of patient partners. The examples provided are intended to demonstrate that patient engagement gone wrong is more common than discussed openly, and to simply bring this to light. This article is not intending to lay blame, rather to evolve and improve patient engagement initiatives. We ask those who interact with patient partners to reflect so we can all work towards improving patient engagement. Lean into the discomfort with these conversations as that is the only way to change these all too recognizable examples, and which will lead to better project outcomes and experiences for all team members.

Facilitating non-tokenistic user involvement in research

BACKGROUND

With the increase in user activism in the Western societies in recent years, there has also been an increase in promoting user involvement in research. Hence, is necessary to address the danger of tokenism, a false appearance of inclusiveness, in user involvement, as well as to explore methods for promoting active user involvement. Using a Norwegian research project on the rehabilitation processes following traumatic injuries organised via user involvement, this study reviews ways in which to avoid tokenism in user involvement and how to instead stimulate active user engagement in research.

METHODS

The analysis employs an ethnographic approach using participant observations from real life settings involving user involvement during the five years research process. The empirical material includes 472 pages of transcribed audio recordings from meetings between researchers and collaborators discussing personal experiences with traumatic injuries, and 340 pages of documents on the project's involvement process. This empirical material was examined by thematic analysis, involving processes such as decontextualising, flagging and re-contextualising.

RESULTS

Two main categories of facilitation emerged as promoting non-tokenistic, active user involvement in research: 1) defining the collaborative arena, (i.e. the setting of collaboration) which entails preparing for participation and promoting active involvement, and 2) designing for research counselling, which involves gathering user perspectives and valuing criticism. Taking into account the existing asymmetric relationships between researchers and collaborators, enabling more evenly distributed power dynamics also proved to be essential.

CONCLUSIONS

To achieve active participation that is relevant to the collaborators, two interconnected yet analytically independent themes should be considered: the collaborative arena and counselling. Both prove crucial for curbing power imbalance and stimulating the involvement process. The study indicates that non-tokenistic involvement should be anchored in the respect for participants and their ability to make contributions. This analysis can help researchers who seek active engagement and non-tokenistic involvement in research to find methods for facilitating and organising participation in their fields.

Early-career researchers' views on ethical dimensions of patient engagement in research

Background

Increasing attention and efforts are being put towards engaging patients in health research, and some have even argued that patient engagement in research (PER) is an ethical imperative. Yet there is relatively little empirical data on ethical issues associated with PER.

Methods

A three-round Delphi survey was conducted with a panel of early-career researchers (ECRs) involved in PER. One of the objectives was to examine the ethical dimensions of PER as well as ECRs’ self-perceived level of preparedness to conduct PER ethically. The study was conducted among awardees of the Québec SPOR-SUPPORT Unit in Canada, who represent the next generation of researchers involved in PER. Many themes were addressed throughout the study, such as definition, values, patients’ roles, expected characteristics of patients, and anticipated challenges (including ethical issues). Open-ended questions were used, and all quantitative data were collected through statements using 7-point Likert scales.

Results

Between April and November 2016, 25 ECRs were invited to participate; 18 completed both the first and second rounds, and 16 completed the third round. Panelists consisted of nine women and seven men with various backgrounds (general practitioners and postgraduate students). The majority were between 25 and 44 years old. Panelists’ responses showed PER raises important ethical issues: 1) professionalization of patients involved in research (with risks of patients becoming less representative); 2) adequate remuneration of patients; 3) fair recognition of patients’ experiential knowledge; and 4) tokenism (engaging patients only for symbolic appeal). While the panelists felt moderately prepared to confront these ethical issues, they reported being uncomfortable applying for an ethics certificate for a PER project.

Conclusion

If PER is an ethical imperative, it is vital to establish clear ethical standards and to train and support the PER community to identify and resolve ethical issues. Despite their overall readiness to conduct PER, panelists did not feel adequately prepared to address many of these issues. It is not easy for ECRs to reconcile ethical desiderata and logistical imperatives. Additional research should focus on supporting the responsible conduct of PER, which, if not done, can undermine the credibility and feasibility of the entire PER enterprise.

Parvenus and conflict in elite cohorts

Previous studies find that greater workplace diversity leads to higher degrees of conflict in low and medium-status workgroups. This paper examines whether similar dynamics operate in elite cohorts. We use data from a survey of White House Fellows (N=475) to look at how the presence of parvenus-individuals from underrepresented groups in elite environments-change the rate at which fellows reported conflict with each other and with the director of the program. We find that there is no unified "parvenu experience." Analysis of the interaction between race and cohort diversity reveals inflection points consistent with Kanter's (1977) theory of tokenism, but the effects of increasing diversity diverge: for Hispanics, conflict with the director increases with diversity, while for Asians, conflict falls with diversity. While other groups' level of conflict with their peers stays roughly constant, Asians' reported level of conflict with their peers increases with diversity.