Equality and Human Rights Mainstreaming strategy: consultation analysis

7. Enhancing Capability and Culture

The fifth driver set out in the consultation paper is the need to enhance capability and culture. The Scottish Government suggest this means equipping public sector staff, at all levels, with the skills, knowledge and motivation to fully integrate equality and human rights into everything they do. It is acknowledged that investment is required to ensure all staff have a suitable base level of knowledge and skills, and that specific and specialist roles require more in-depth skills. It is noted that training and development must recognise the needs of different groups e.g. the specific need for disability and gender competence.

The Scottish Government is piloting Centres of Expertise in Government portfolios to develop officials’ understanding of equality and human rights in different policy areas. An underpinning principle is to offer ‘just in time’ training, development and resources – a learning approach that provides employees with the necessary information and skills precisely when they need them, rather than in advance.

Q16. Do you agree that enhancing capability and culture is a key driver of mainstreaming equality and human rights?

Among those answering Q16, 88% agreed that enhancing capability and culture is a key driver for mainstreaming equality and human rights; 10% disagreed, and 2% were unsure. Almost all organisations agreed (97%), compared to 58% of individuals.

Support for enhancing capability and culture

Just over half of respondents left an open comment to explain their answer. Many respondents agreed that enhancing capability and culture should be a key driver. Reasons included that cultural change is central to the Strategy’s success, that it is critical for creating policy that reduces inequality, and that it can help create a culture that values diversity, inclusion and respect and change attitudes and behaviours.

Building staff knowledge and skills

The role of training and skills development was mentioned by many, most of whom were positive about the changes this could achieve. For instance, training was seen as a way to address existing skills and knowledge gaps, enabling staff to innovate more effectively and implement policies and ultimately improve equality outcomes in society.

Specific considerations raised by respondents included that: a wide range of staff or the whole workforce should have learning opportunities so mainstreaming work was not siloed; training delivery could be delegated to third sector organisations; staff should have a clear development pathway; training should come with certification; and induction and refresher training should be offered, such as in advance of conducting audits or for those in leadership positions.

Some respondents cautioned against adopting a ‘passive’ approach involving simple information cascading or attending a one-off training course or, conversely, not over-complicating the landscape with a mass of resources. To ensure mainstreaming is fully embedded within organisations, some others recommended integrating training alongside everyday work. For instance, one organisation noted that day-to-day involvement with civil servants working on specific policy areas was a more sustainable and in-depth way of developing capability compared to training events.

Change starts at the top

The need to ensure managers and leaders were leading cultural change or involved in initiatives to improve their knowledge and skills was highlighted by some. Resistance to change, or a desire to maintain the status quo, in large institutions, was noted by a few respondents who felt this needed to be addressed in order for cultural change to be effective. Ensuring managers and leaders were familiar with mainstreaming human rights was felt necessary to support staff to deliver related activities.

Concerns with the proposal

A range of concerns or perceived unintended consequences were raised by some respondents in relation to the driver. These included that existing initiatives to try and enhance capability and culture had limited impact to date, and by extension, the proposal would have limited impact. For instance, it was felt that similar efforts had been ongoing since the introduction of the Equality Act 2010, and there was still a lack of understanding of equalities terms and concepts in public bodies.

Other issues

A few respondents cautioned against the view in the consultation paper that effective mainstreaming would reduce the need for direct input from equality and human rights staff, as it was felt they continue to be best placed to provide reassurance, suggest remedial actions to overcome barriers or identify unconscious biases staff may hold. The issue of whether to separate the drivers of culture and capability was discussed by a few respondents at both Q16 and Q17. Most were in favour of separating these drivers so as not to dilute either, but one disagreed on the basis that it was a false distinction and the two were inextricably linked.

Q17. Have we captured the core elements of enhancing capability and culture within the context of mainstreaming?

Among those who answered Q17, just over half (53%) felt that the Scottish Government had captured the core elements of enhancing capability and culture within the context of mainstreaming; one third (33%) did not and 14% were unsure. There was a marked difference between individuals and organisations, with 27% of individuals expressing a positive view compared to 61% of organisations. At least half of all types of organisations felt the core elements had been captured, with 70% of local authorities and 90% of other public bodies agreeing, compared to 52% of equality advocacy organisations.

Agreement

Half of all respondents left an open comment to explain their answer. Many respondents commented that the proposed actions had captured the core elements of enhancing capability and culture. Areas particularly welcomed by these respondents included capability being a ‘vital element’, methods to enhance capability and culture being clearly set out including an emphasis on evaluation, the importance of leadership being reflected, and a holistic approach being advocated.

Disagreement

A critique of the elements was given by several respondents, who either disagreed that the proposals would achieve desired outcomes or felt that aspects were missing. Reasons for why the proposals would not be effective included that they read as an idealised ‘wish list’, that it was unclear how they would be applied to the wider public sector, that there was a risk of it being a ‘one size fits all’ approach, or that existing challenges such as high workloads would be a barrier to action.

Aspects to include or emphasise

Some respondents disagreed with the question as they felt elements had been missed. Some other respondents suggested aspects that they felt should be included, even though they did not necessarily disagree at the closed question.

Q18. What actions would you recommend to ensure that enhancing capability and culture as outlined will contribute to the achievement of mainstreaming?

Training and upskilling

Almost two thirds of respondents answered Q18. Views on training and upskilling were provided by many respondents at Q18 and some at Q17. These have been included in the analysis below, along with other comments made throughout the consultation.

Some respondents commented on how training should be delivered. Suggestions included using pilot programmes (which was also suggested at engagement events), making training mandatory, planning and coordinating training e.g. offering a calendar of learning events and the Scottish Government designing a suite of resources, offering practice placements, and revising its assessment framework to include foundational knowledge on intersectional gender equality. One respondent felt training should be delivered by specialist equality and human rights organisations, while another called for investment in training for specialist roles, such as within the Deafblind sector.

A few raised capacity issues, such as participants having time to attend training or the need for more skilled trainers. Some other respondents considered accessibility in training and learning opportunities important, for instance, by making ‘centres of expertise’ accessible to public sector workers and making resources freely available.

Aspects of training that were felt important to emphasise included wider inclusion and diversity issues, i.e. not just specific to the workplace, training for leaders, ensuring a continuous improvement approach to training, recognising the needs of different groups, and developing a focus on disability and gender competence. Another respondent felt that training in relation to equality and human rights budgeting was also important.

Some respondents advocated for an ongoing approach to training and professional development. These views included calls for regular evaluations, ongoing capacity building, and responsiveness to feedback. A few respondents specifically welcomed the idea of using ‘just-in-time’ training or suggested that this approach should be supplemented by wider training to ensure those not involved in such initiatives are included. However, a few sought more details about this approach, with concerns that a ‘just-in-time’ approach may result in short and tokenistic training.

Monitoring and review mechanisms

Calls were made by several respondents at Q18 and some at Q19 to ensure effective monitoring and review mechanisms, such as reporting systems, are in place. A few called for an initial audit or review of existing levels of capability and culture or of the impact of existing training approaches. A focus on collecting and analysing data to monitor progress was suggested, as was regularly reviewing and updating capacity-building initiatives.

Organisational issues

Several respondents raised issues to address at an organisational level. Points included the need to stress that a real commitment to change was required; that equality, diversity, and inclusion should be embedded into recruitment, appraisal, and performance management processes, the need to retain specialist workers; to ensure a diverse workforce; and the need for clear frameworks of accountability, such as setting out knowledge, skills, and behavioural requirements.

Comments on policy development

Some respondents commented on how the Scottish Government could enhance capability or culture in policy development. These varied suggestions included the need for clear policy structures and forums, to develop and adhere to national standards, to adopt a twin-track approach to mainstreaming with a national strategy on intersectional gender equality, to embed quality and human rights from the outset in policy development, the formation of a Cross-Party Group on Deafblindness, and to align the Strategy with existing statutory responsibilities in relation to equality, diversity, inclusion and human rights.

Q19. Do you agree that this Strategy will provide a foundation to influence a culture of mainstreaming equality and human rights within Scottish Government and the wider public sector?

Just under half (48%) of those answering Q19 agreed that the Strategy will provide a foundation to influence a culture of mainstreaming equality and human rights within the Scottish Government and the wider public sector. 22% disagreed, and 30% were unsure. Three in ten (30%) individuals agreed, compared to 54% of organisations.

Reasons for agreement

Seven in ten respondents commented to explain their answer. Many commented on why they agreed that the Strategy could provide a foundation to influence a culture of mainstreaming equality and human rights. For instance, it was felt that tools such as the proposed Action Plan and toolkit would support the translation of strategic goals into tangible progress and that the Strategy offered a structured and comprehensive approach. Qualified agreement was given by a few respondents who highlighted that the Strategy could drive change if it is implemented effectively by offering support, ensuring high-quality consistent training, and organisations making a sustained effort to embed core principles within their work.

Perceived implementation challenges

Some respondents at Q19 and some at Q17 raised possible challenges to implementation. These included concerns about organisational inertia or resistance to change, placing excess pressure on people with lived experience to deliver change, and sidelining specialist staff in the workplace. Recurring themes, such as concerns about timescales, access to resources, and leadership commitment were also reiterated.

Efficacy concerns

Concerns about how effective the Strategy would be in addressing this issue were raised by some, half of whom answered ‘don’t know’ at the closed question. Suggestions to strengthen effectiveness were given, such as ensuring full buy-in and understanding of the importance of mainstreaming; adopting a sustainable approach to transformation; implementing existing commitments; addressing systematic obstacles; having more concrete actions and specification of desired changes; and using quality data that reflects people’s experiences. A few highlighted different public bodies that they thought may be best at leading the way in mainstreaming and demonstrating best practice.

Interactions with other policies

Some respondents recommended that existing policies or policy development should be considered alongside the Strategy. For example, all policies need to consider equality implications when being developed. Specific policies mentioned by respondents included the legal duty to mainstream the PSED and the policy on the wellbeing economy.