18 Knowledge Management for DEIA And Culture Transformation

This piece explores the value of knowledge management for fostering and sustaining diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility (DEIA) and healthy workplace cultures. Knowledge management has been described variously as “the capacity to retain, develop, organize, and utilize employees’ capabilities.”^[1] It is about the “brain power”^[2] of an organization, and is essential for identifying and leveraging the collective knowledge of an organization to ensure efficiency and encourage innovation.

Knowledge management is useful for enhancing the effectiveness of DEIA and culture transformation work in several ways.

1. Progress towards achieving a fully inclusive organizational culture is incremental and requires the retention of knowledge amid staff turnover and changing political contexts. Indices of processes that help us understand past successes and failures in the DEIA space are essential for transforming it. Indices of practices and transitions that weaken or strengthen DEIA and culture are critical metrics for improving progress towards meaningful outcomes. Without knowledge of the “before,” there is little context for the development of new ideas and the transmission of knowledge to impact culture change in the organization.

A meaningful example from within NSF is its transition from an existing DEIA strategic plan to a Culture Forward Strategy. This transition occurred as the OCDIO was being established and marked an effort to leverage knowledge of the organization to improve its culture and “future proof” our work amid political backlash against DEIA language and practices. Without knowledge of NSF’s history with DEIA strategies, the approach of previous offices in crafting DEIA messaging, and existing gaps in DEIA acumen across the organization, OCDIO would have little context within which to develop strategies and tools.

Another example from within NSF relates to its history of communicating changes in processes and management to employees. After launching the Denison survey of organizational culture and engaging in listening sessions after releasing results, we learned that past practices of communicating shifts in process seemed to work better than current processes. For example, during the COVID-19 pandemic, employees found initial communications during the pandemic to be supportive, accommodating, and collaborative. We also learned that communications about the transition back to the office as the pandemic waned were perceived as abrupt and inconsiderate of employees’ needs. Knowledge of past practices – in this case, what “worked” – informed our understanding of how subsequent practices failed.

2. DEIA and organizational change work requires developing new knowledge and shifting perspectives in how people think about the organization. The development of new knowledge aids in capacity building for ensuring the effectiveness of strategies for culture transformation. Furthermore, new tools and metrics can be applied across an organization and triangulated with existing forms of knowledge.

A meaningful example from NSF is the rollout of the Denison culture survey as a supplement and comparison to the Federal Employee Viewpoint Survey (FEVS). By administering the Denison survey, we gained valuable insight into how employees perceive NSF’s culture and found that when focus shifted towards perceptions of the organization, new insights into areas of improvement came into view. The survey revealed key areas of concern, including trust in leadership, alignment with the mission of the agency, and issues with transparency and communication. In contrast with FEVS, the Denison survey measured culture – the “we” as it exists via shared values, capacity and capabilities, and internal and external focus. This in contrast with the traditional measures in the FEVS, which are meant to reveal individual perceptions of the “climate” of the organization and the general experience of working at NSF at a point in time. The Culture Action Plan emerging from the Denison survey results provide a “north star” for developing a plan for culture change, which includes focus areas, actions, and milestones.

Another meaningful example of the development of new knowledge is the Sexual Orientation and Gender Identity (SOGI) Workforce Pilot Survey. The administration of the survey was pursuant to a Presidential Executive Order calling for more data and knowledge of how to ask SOGI questions on federal surveys. The knowledge gained from the survey will be useful to NSF’s human resources management processes, as well as to the Office of Personnel Management’s (OPM) efforts to incorporate SOGI metrics into federal surveys and human resources tools.

3. Organizing and indexing “what we know” and “how we know it” are critical for the retention of knowledge and identification of areas to produce new knowledge. Organized knowledge helps us to understand how to “move the needle” towards more inclusive practices. Organizing knowledge goes beyond the use of human resources tools and is a way of structuring and communicating how various metrics contribute to a full picture of the organization’s cultural health. The organization of knowledge sets precedent for future practices and builds capacity for identifying strengths and areas for growth.

At NSF, we use various tools to understand the organizational health of the agency and its current progress in achieving DEIA, meaningful culture change, and mission alignment. Within the OCDIO, we use a variety of metrics to build knowledge of the agency; we then organize that knowledge to better understand the organization’s areas of strength and develop growth strategies. In addition to triangulating surveys like FEVS and Denison, we have developed additional tools to build and organize our understanding of the cultural health of the agency. The Denison survey allowed us to identify areas of concern in the culture of the organization, including the perception that the agency’s culture is “top down” and that staff across directorates and divisions have different perceptions of the agency’s mission and how to support it.

Leadership styles must be assessed to ameliorate perceptions of a “top down” culture and prioritize inclusivity at all levels. As we roll out a Culture Action Plan to address areas of concern, we will triangulate that action plan with a Culture Forward Maturity Model to assess the agency’s progress from merely ensuring EEO compliance to achieving fully inclusive practices. The Maturity Model is a way of organizing knowledge gained from internal surveys, documents, policies, and qualitative inputs to assess the agency’s status on a continuum from compliance to inclusivity and make growth areas transparent and actionable.

Independent from DEIA work and culture change, knowledge management is a way of maintaining the integrity of the work of the agency despite changes, both internally and externally. It ensures processes and operations remain in place and work efficiently despite organizational restructuring and shifts in personnel. It is a way of leveraging knowledge to ensure future succession lines and prepare for challenges and disruptions to our current modes of operating. Typical barriers to knowledge management include individualizing job roles without plans to retain institutional knowledge and ensure efficiency in the case of staff turnover and organizational transformations. By leveraging knowledge management, single points of failure are no longer obstacles to efficiency, effectiveness, and overall trust in the organization; challenges and perceived failures can be addressed through processes and tools in place. Similarly, social structural changes, such as major transitions in the federal government, are easier to manage with knowledge management processes in place to ensure continuity and adaptability.