Many workplaces focus on ‘inclusion’ without clearly defining what it entails. Experiences of inclusion can be a complex process, and people perceive inclusion initiatives and mechanisms differently (Nguyen et al., 2024). The focus is often on individual identity markers rather than the structural and institutional mechanisms that create inequality (Aarseth, Bråten & Lund, 2022). 

In the context of Norwegian academia, it can therefore be useful to distinguish between formal and informal workplace procedures (Erdal, Knutsen & Midtbøen, 2019). Formal procedures can include things like the allocation of work tasks and who receives promotions or permanent positions, while informal procedures can involve meeting culture, social norms, dress code and language use. 

Informal workplace procedures

Informal procedures can also involve social mechanisms. In all organisations, there are social mechanisms that distribute power, resources, expectations regarding behaviour, and certain types of tasks that are valued more than others. What often happens is that these dynamics become important for career opportunities (for example, the people who are most liked get the most opportunities and are invited into key networks), while others are excluded regardless of their academic expertise. International research shows that women and ethnic minorities are more likely to report feeling isolated from their academic communities, because their professional identity is overshadowed by their gender and ethnicity (Willis, Bridges & Jozkowski, 2021).

In this area, the mapping can place particular focus on social mechanisms and awareness of power dynamics.  People with both formal and informal power (such as senior researchers, permanent staff, and academic supervisors) have a responsibility to be aware of the attitudes they pass on to new and temporary employees, both during the onboarding process and in the working environment in general. 

Being aware of ‘work culture’ is a very broad concept. Here are some things that can be observed with a critically attentive eye: 

• Insider/outsider dynamics: What are the social cliques within the academic community, and are there individuals who are being excluded? What might be the reason behind this exclusion? 
• The lunchroom: who participates in communal lunches and social events – and are there individuals who often stay away from these social arenas? What might be the reason for this?

Academic inclusion

While social inclusion is important, academic inclusion (having one’s expertise respected and utilised) is just as important for fostering a sense of belonging. International research shows that ethnic minorities report a need to be respected and recognised as competent, whereas their white colleagues sought to be liked. (Bergsieker, Shelton & Richeson, 2010). Therefore, one can also observe:

• Distribution of work tasks. Which types of tasks are prestigious, and which carry less status? Who performs meritorious work and who performs non-meritorious work in your working environment? Are there any recurring patterns? 
• Is there anyone who is consistently asked to perform a certain type of task?
• What is the meeting culture like? Who sets the tone – speaks the most, and is listened to? Are there individuals who are mostly silent or not given the opportunity to speak? What consequences could this pattern have? 

From these observations, one can use the elicitation model described under ‘tools’ to implement measures.