Disposable diversity

By

A focus on hiring for cultural and societal norms to meet client expectations within public relations practice is holding back progress on diversity and inclusivity in the UK.

Diversity goals are treated as optional and easily discarded rather than a requisite, according to a recent study published in Public Relations Inquiry.

Researchers Lee Edwards from the London School of Economics and Sundeep Aulakh from the University of Leeds call the situation the disposability of diversity.

The study finds that recruitment practices play an essential role in shaping diversity outcomes in public relations practice. A focus on client service and emphasis on ‘fit’ favours candidates matching the dominant identities, making it harder for diverse candidates to get hired.

Candidates are evaluated based on subjective judgements of their social and cultural capital (personality, interests, embodiment etc.) made from the client’s assumed perspective. It embeds bias and marginalises those not fitting the white, middle-class norm.

The rhetoric of ‘fit’ helps justify discriminatory decisions as just good business sense and matching client needs. Diversity is seen as risky rather than an opportunity. So, improving diversity becomes a casualty of professional logic that serves the mutual interests of public relations and recruitment.

The study confirms recruitment’s role in consolidating the lack of diversity in UK public relations through boundary-making practices that differentiate admissible and excluded candidates. The figure of the client is invoked to rationalise the exclusion of candidates based on race, class and gender.

The research calls on leadership within public relations practice to build a genuine commitment to diversity and inclusion.

The study is based on semi-structured interviews with 16 participants – UK-based public relations recruiters (4 male, 12 female, notably all presenting as white British).

Edwards, L., & Aulakh, S. (2024). Public relations recruitment as boundary-making: The client, the ‘fit’ and the disposability of diversity. Public Relations Inquiry13(1), 93-112.