Ingroup Forums

Led by our Icelandic team, two of the GEiO teams (Team Iceland and Team UK) carried out ingroup forums with their data partners.

What are Ingroup Forums (IF)?

Ingroup forums are group meetings where research team members meet with employees of the data partner company. The aim of these meetings is twofold: First, to share with the participating companies the results of the research carried out. Second, to create a forum for the participants to discuss these findings with the research team and among themselves.

Why do IF?

Doing IF provides direct benefits to companies for their participation and contribution to the project.  

How do you run IF?

How many forums/how many people?

If possible, it is recommended that at least three ingroup forums be held within each company. 

The groups should consist of approximately 10 company employees each, selected horizontally to encourage sharing and avoid power imbalances. The specific composition of each group may vary between companies (e.g. an all-women's group might be preferred, or a mixed-gender group of administrative staff).

The steps

Before the forum, participants will receive a summary of the main findings from the research team.

The researcher guides and facilitates the discussions, and participants are encouraged to share their experiences and views. Participants are asked to keep information shared in the forum confidential. 

Each forum should take approximately 60 minutes and have three segments. First, the researcher introduces the summary of findings with examples from the data. Second, the participants discuss the findings among themselves using prompts provided by the researcher. Third, the researcher asks the group to share what they discussed and is prepared to address any queries or even resistance to the findings if necessary. 

The discussions are audio-recorded, with the participants’ permission. 

What is the purpose of IF for the GEiO project? 

An important part of the GEiO project is to provide feedback to stakeholders. The ingroup forums are designed to educate and raise awareness about the research findings. 

As researchers, it gives us an opportunity to map and analyse how the findings are discussed within the companies. Based on those discussions we can pinpoint likely obstacles to equity in the workplace. It is common to encounter resistance when working towards workplace equality. IF is meant to be a forum for introducing the research findings, receiving reactions from stakeholders, and addressing anticipated resistance. Thus, the IF allows us to encounter resistance and unpack it. 

What are the outcomes/benefits? 

The discussions from the  ingroup forums are analysed and used to map gendered power relations, barriers, and opportunities regarding equality in the company. 

Research projects that have utilised similar forums demonstrate that they can raise awareness among directors and staff on diverse issues related to gender equality in the workplace. A key element of successful gender equality projects is that they provide a secure space for reflective dialogue among stakeholders to assess gender-based power dynamics and thereby identify ways to improve them.

What we did in the UK

We held 3 forums at our data partner’s organisation to feedback our initial analysis (of  study 1 and study 2 ).

Who took part?

Group 1 consisted of 5 men, drawn horizontally from across the company.

Group 2 consisted of 5 women, again drawn horizontally from across the company.

Group 3 was a mixed gender group (4 men and 2 women)  comprising section heads and leaders.

Methods/steps

We followed the protocol of the method described above with the exception that due to the size of  groups 1 and 2, we opted for one whole-group discussion within each group (rather than splitting the group into small groups to feedback to the larger one). This worked well.

How did they go?

Everybody took part enthusiastically in the forums. Participants were interested in our summary of initial data findings and contributed insightful comments to the discussions. Some people expressed how they hadn’t expected to be surprised by our findings, but that they had found many of the items to be though-provoking.

What did we find?

Here is a summary of our key findings from the forums:

• Participants were surprised by the range of opinions expressed about videoconferencing in the Q study. They hadn’t previously considered that people held such varying views. In particular, they were surprised by how many people expressed negative opinions about online meetings.
•  There is a sense that online environments might have an equalising effect on hierarchical/power relationships. Eg, some participants felt more able to speak up in online meetings than in in-person meetings.
• There was discussion in the all-female group of online spaces being safer than in male-dominated in-person spaces.
• For men, online spaces ‘neutralised’ their physical presence. A couple of male participants suggested that height and stature advantaged them in in-person meetings, as they could ‘draw’ on this to lend authority/weight to their contributions. They commented that everyone was the same size in online meetings.
• Self-consciousness/self-awareness. There were interesting and different opinions expressed around this theme according to gender. Male participants reported increased physical self-awareness/consciousness in online meetings whereas female participants. reported feeling less self-conscious, and better able to control what is seen.
• In all groups, there was discussion about relative contributions by men and women in meetings and the amount of interruptions that took place. In the all-female group, it was agreed that women’s contributions were relatively  brief as they would be judged negatively if they talked too much.
• In the all- male group, there was discussion about  whether unconscious bias meant that attendees in meetings listened less attentively to female speakers than to male speakers.
•  One of our findings suggested that women’s contributions are often ‘interrupted’ by encouraging noises/responses such as ‘yes’, ‘good point’ etc. One male participant said he hadn’t thought about this before, but it was something he recognised and he felt there was some truth in this.  He acknowledged a dilemma, saying that he wanted to support women if they contribute as he’s aware of their scarcity in meetings but could see how, by cutting in with supportive comments, that might stop their flow.
• Our discussions indicated there may be some age differences in how online meetings are experienced  - some of the younger participants had no experience of in-person meetings, so felt unable to compare experiences. Some of the older participants felt that young people may have missed out on building relationships.
• Finally, there was a consensus across the three groups that online meetings were too convenient – that it was too easy to put a meeting in the diary.

How might taking part in the forums change behaviour?

• Participants felt they felt they would be more conscious of the diverse views on videoconferencing when planning future meetings. Some participants (in the female group) said they would try and encourage more in-person meetings to support those who might not like online meetings so much.
• To address our previous finding that chairs tend to dominate meetings, one group said they would think about introducing a rotating chair to some of their meetings.
• One participant said he would be more conscious about his online interactions, especially in relation to how he responded and listened to female participants.
• Female participants said they will now be more aware of how men are reacting to women when they are speaking in online meetings and that maybe they will be able to call things out a bit more.
• Overall, the forums were successful as a conscious-raising activity. As one participant said in relation to some of our findings ‘she will notice it, and pass it on’.

What’s next?

We have a couple of things planned:

• We will share our report with our data partners and invite further feedback.
• We will return to our data partners to find out about the long-term impact of being involved in our project.
• We will be carrying out a cross-cultural analysis with the Icelandic team of our respective ingroup forum experiences and findings and writing this up as a paper.