Successful staff onboarding creates an equitable environment from day one.
By Em Camden Doolittle and Kawami Evans
Think about when you started your most recent job. The human resources department gave you some forms to fill out. You likely were shown your desk, introduced to your new colleagues, learned where to get the best coffee, and met with someone from IT to get connected to the wi-fi. These are all useful steps, but they barely scratch the surface of what successful onboarding looks like on today’s campuses. Truly integrating staff means orienting them to their roles, the culture of the department, and what it means to be a member of the community. The onboarding process marks the beginning of staff retention and can signal the value that campus housing departments are likely to place on diversity and inclusion, which makes it critical to communicate and demonstrate an authentic culture of equity from the start.
Most people understand that onboarding new employees is a long and complex process, but few are aware that it can also be used as a strategic tool for ensuring equity. When you add to the mix factors like the ongoing pandemic, the Great Resignation, increased awareness of systemic oppression, dwindling resources, and politically charged atmospheres – to name just a few – the process becomes even more complex. Add to this the fact that organizations are now striving to take a proactive approach by using the onboarding process as a tool to move forward with equity rather than just as a reactive response to unfolding events or to what happened in the past. This means ensuring that the onboarding process is intentional, focused, and timely. While it is one thing to identify and change unjust policies, an equity-focused approach allows administrators to enact equitable principles through a carefully designed onboarding process. Those tasks that can easily appear like boxes to check off a to-do list are being re-evaluated to become more meaningful. Who does the new staff meet in the earliest days? What opportunities are they given to reflect on what they have learned and to ask follow-up questions? How can they provide useful feedback? How can they best begin to leave their imprint on the organization rather than merely being absorbed by all (both good and bad) that came before them?
Before offering solutions, though, it’s important to define what equity means within this context. Both the concept and the term have been the subject of increased scrutiny both on and off campuses as they have been analyzed, dissected, and twisted to fit different narratives.
One way to define equity is to say what it is not, and despite the proliferation of DEI programs and initiatives, equity should not be used as a substitute for diversity or inclusion. In her 2012 book On Being Included: Racism and Diversity in Institutional Life, Sara Ahmed argues that the word diversity is too restrictive and has been reduced to its “commercial value” – i.e., used by higher education institutions as a marketing tool in order to make diversity a brand that will attract more students. Ahmed adds that diversity is also a “management term” because when valued as a human resource, diversity focuses on individual differences rather than “systematic inequalities within universities.” Meanwhile, Ahmed contends that inclusion is “a way of bringing those who have been recognized as strangers” into the organization – but the expectation is that they will simply reproduce the organization as it currently exists. As author Bryant Alexander suggests in a 2023 article, “Onboarding, Orientation, and Mentoring as Culture-Crafting Processes,” for people of color or LGBTQ employees, entering “predominately White/heteronormative universities [can involve] sometimes complicitous processes of (re)producing and not troubling organizational practices that support systems of cultural containment and contempt.”
Scholars like Tia Brown McNair, Estela Mara Bensimon, and Lindsay Malcom-Piqueux attempt to describe what equity is by saying that it involves providing new staff with an environment in which to thrive – the emphasis here being on what the employee rather than the institution will gain. In their book From Equity Talk to Equity Walk (2020), they assert that student affairs professionals at all levels, but particularly administrators, must be empowered to “examine institutional policies, practices, and structures through a lens that questions why inequities exist [in order] to change the educational environment.” This applies not only to the experience of underrepresented and minoritized students, but also to staff, inasmuch as they have also entered challenging work environments often steeped in institutional cultures of racism, cisgender heteronormativity, and a host of unwritten rules. To support staff equitably requires the strategic engagement of psychological, structural, and financial resources.
According to Dustin Grabsch, assistant provost for undergraduate education and academic success at Southern Methodist University (SMU), onboarding with equity begins with people being committed and empowered to make a change. In the case of SMU, they engaged several diversity officers: one for each school, college, and department on campus. “These officers address campus- and university-wide issues like hiring guidelines and training on topics such as implicit bias. Our cultural intelligence training is required for all staff, faculty, and students, as well as other essential topics,” Grabsch says. “The officers also help connect and amplify DEI-related events and programs.” At the University of California, Davis, the vice chancellor of student affairs, along with the vice chancellor’s council, identified 20 equity leaders charged with exploring concerns about issues (such as pay equity) that are impacted by racial disparities.
Focusing solely on how an individual will perform specific tasks without asking for or considering that person’s goals and vision for their work makes it seem that they are merely a replaceable cog in the machine, but enhancing their social capital allows them to form networks of meaningful relationships.
While some staff may focus on making systemic improvements, others can promote equity through one-on-one professional relationships. Research conducted at Ohio University found that “new institutional staff members require guidance to understanding the institutional culture, values, and essential relationships.” In practice, identifying essential relationships requires a supervisor or human resources manager to consider the identities, previous experiences, or expressed needs that a staff member brings to the position and then connecting them with other staff who can continue to mentor them.
Mentoring programs can help new staff connect to other staff and to available resources. The mentoring efforts at SMU begin with a simple email called Identity-Conscious Spaces on the Hilltop that is sent to staff at the beginning of each semester. This message shares information about campus culture and highlights identity-conscious groups that new staff can connect with on campus. Many of these groups also offer programs that allow staff to increase the range of their knowledge and experiences. “It is a way to opt into the additional community beyond their office and division. This helps diversity in the social network at the university as well,” says Grabsch.
Hilary Lichterman, director of housing and residence life at Seattle University, explains how her campus connects new staff to their new off-campus community by helping them find groups that share their identities and interests. “We work hard to establish the norm from the start that work is not one’s full identity and that feeling part of and connected to one’s personal communities is essential for their well-being and success.” Identifying key people, programs, and policies that can support a new staff member, departmental leaders and supervisors make space for new staff to show up fully as themselves. At the University of Canterbury, staff are provided with information about the local Indigenous culture (whose land the university occupies) as the first part of their onboarding practice to connect staff to the off-campus community. The university maintains strong connections to the Māori (the Indigenous First Nations people), whose rich cultural heritage can serve as a touchpoint for new staff to understand and appreciate the larger community.
Creating an onboarding practice grounded in equity requires that administrators share values that align with and amplify those of the department and the institution. Leading with values marks a commitment to providing more than just an orientation focusing on transactional and skill-based tasks. Orientation differs from onboarding in many respects; essentially, orientation is a one-time event that is part of the larger process of onboarding, which involves a series of events and trainings. While orientation to a role is important, this approach only meets the needs of the institution, while onboarding focuses on what new staff need in order to thrive.
Given the multiple, complex job responsibilities of those in student housing, dining, and residential life positions, making space for tricky conversations about the culture of a department can seem daunting. Though the orientation process is intended to integrate new staff into a department in a general way, it should be enriched with whatever staff really need to do their jobs well – social capital. In an article about community cultural wealth, Tara Yosso defines social capital as the “networks of people and community resources” that are part of an individual’s overall cultural wealth. Focusing solely on how an individual will perform specific tasks without asking for or considering that person’s goals and vision for their work makes it seem that they are merely a replaceable cog in the machine, but enhancing their social capital allows them to form networks of meaningful relationships.
To address this need at UC Davis, the executive director for inclusion, culture, and belonging created the Student Housing and Dining Services Standards of Engagement. This one-page document, inspired by Brené Brown’s 2018 book Dare to Lead, clearly articulates eight core values of their department, each with a corresponding mindset or attitude and a description of the behavior and actions expected from staff in all positions.
Three of the most important values in terms of diversity efforts are collaboration, communication, and respect. Collaboration corresponds with the mindset of “We is We” and can involve a department bringing together people who “understand [that] our work is interconnected and interdependent, focus on the tasks and goals at hand, willingly give and receive feedback, and approach work with a sense of possibility and positivity.” Communication corresponds with the mindset of Brown’s adage “Clear is Kind.” The corresponding actions include communicating clearly and honestly; effectively expressing ideas, feelings, and thoughts both verbally and non-verbally; reflecting on implicit and explicit biases; assuming positive intent; being mindful of tone and word choices; and talking to people rather than about them. Finally, respect corresponds with the mindset of “Everyone is the Chancellor.” Staff are expected to treat colleagues with respect, value contributions and opinions, and respond in a timely and appropriate manner. These explicitly articulated values represent a living document that is continually updated based on staff feedback.
An equitable onboarding practice acknowledges that there are some expectations and practices in every workplace environment that may not be spelled out explicitly but are still expected from staff. These expectations are not connected to the transactional elements listed in a job description, nor are they included in the official values statement of a department; instead, they constitute what Eric Margolis called the “hidden curriculum” – implicit expectations, values, and norms within an organization.
The onboarding process marks the beginning of staff retention and can signal the value that campus housing departments are likely to place on diversity and inclusion, which makes it critical to communicate and demonstrate an authentic culture of equity from the start.
In practice, addressing the hidden curriculum with new staff can include ongoing conversations about underlying practices within the department. For example, new staff need to understand the power dynamics in a department and how they may play into who is and who is not looped in and consulted on particular decisions. These conversations can also address what seems like rather mundane items: “What is the accepted etiquette and style that applies to staff email messages?” “Do staff prefer a few sentences of check-ins or a direct jump into the question or topic at hand?”
Lichterman explains that she intentionally inserts reflection prompts into the onboarding schedule to open a conversation with new staff about office norms as well as to hear about what they expect from their new environment. She encourages the reflections by using prompts such as “How do you learn best?” “What strategies do you use to organize your learning and your ideas?” “What does inclusive supervision look like to you?” “What does a supportive work environment look like to you?” Conversations like this at the departmental leadership level are critical. They allow leaders to recognize the existence of any cultural deficits and to hear directly from new staff about what they need.
It is also important during onboarding to share departmental norms related to performance management and supervision. How to give and receive feedback can vary from one culture and person to another. Variables such as directness, bluntness, privacy, and who is appropriate to provide such feedback must be considered in terms of individual identities and backgrounds. Discussions about departmental norms must also provide information about (1) the department’s cultural climate, including its philosophy and approach to educating about diversity, equity, and inclusion; (2) the specific options available to staff who identify an equity issue in need of attention; and (3) any departmental politics that dictate engagement expectations based on the role, length of time in the department, or other specific criteria.
At SMU, the first month of onboarding serves as an opportunity to review division- and area-level expectations. These are updated twice a year and cover topics like confidentiality, requests for days off, and the dress code. They also review individual office or team dynamics and expectations that may be shaped by unwritten office rules, such as whether or not it is acceptable to play music during work hours or to store food in the office refrigerator. As Grabsch explains, “This helps ensure that things are explicit and gives the new employee a say in these office practices that others might not know. It also helps remind us to sunset or add new practices that may be causing rub or friction in the office.” Lichterman also encourages revisiting and revising departmental expectations on a regular basis to reduce or delete coded language such as “dress professionally” or “act with the utmost professionalism.” At Seattle, leadership is working to better center equity and inclusion in their office language and to include more pluralistic language in their discussions of concepts such as offering ideas, giving and receiving feedback, and embracing mistakes.
Understanding accepted cultural norms and practices also includes recognizing and identifying organizational trauma. Departments and institutions are organizations built on the collective work of people who have experienced joy and connection while serving students, but the work also involves pain and trauma. Providing an equitable onboarding experience requires leaders to answer questions honestly from new staff about particular stressful or traumatic events that have occurred or can occur on the job so that they have a clear understanding of the work landscape they are entering. This practice serves the important role of preventing the continuation of harms that, when they go unnamed, remain unseen and ongoing. The impact of COVID-19 is a prime example of collective trauma. Student affairs professionals experienced the sudden departure of students and a seismic shift in what was accepted as normal at the onset of the pandemic. And the impact was not equally shared. Supervisors must acknowledge that some staff, typically entry-level staff, bore the brunt of maintaining operations during this time. Simply acknowledging the collective trauma caused by COVID-19 is not enough; departmental leadership must also address the different harms experienced by different staff.
Just as one cannot make up for missed sleep, organizations cannot make up for missed opportunities to demonstrate equity for their newest employees. Promoting a culture of openness and equity, starting at the moment the job offer is accepted, will affect new staff’s decisions on whether or not to stay in a role, in a department, or at an institution. Equitable onboarding includes the cumulative effect of many small opportunities demonstrating that departmental leaders care about staff as people and individuals as much as they care about their work. How managers and supervisors bring new staff on board can humanize the culture of a workplace (or not) and set staff up for success (or failure) in their role. Done well, onboarding encourages staff to help the institution and its culture grow by creating space for their new ideas, perspectives, and experiences to flourish. Making room for staff to show up in the fullness of their humanity can be complicated and daunting, but approaching onboarding as a practice of equity is a tangible place to start.
Em Camden Doolittle is the basic needs manager for student housing and dining services and vice-chair of the Chancellor’s Committee for LGBTQIA+ Communities at the University of California, Davis. Kawami Evans is the executive director of inclusion, culture, and belonging in student housing and dining services and the diversity, equity, and inclusion strategist for the Division of Student Affairs at the University of California, Davis.
