Four key themes emerged from the 2023 dataset. Below we share these themes, highlighting examples and substantial differences across identity groups. We compare results to the 2018 survey when discussing substantial differences. We define a substantial difference as 5 percentage points.

1. Employee satisfaction and recognition of employer commitments to diversity have increased since 2018

On average, respondents in 2023 were satisfied with their work/life balance, current position, and mentorship experiences. More employers across the industry are striving for equitable representation in their staff.

Perceptions of work/life balance remain positive. In 2023, 78 percent of respondents reported that they find it extremely, very, or somewhat easy to achieve a work/life balance, an increase of 2 percentage points compared to 2018. Likely in response to the COVID-19 pandemic, flexible working arrangements are now offered by 91 percent of respondents’ employers compared to 54 percent of 2018 respondents’ employers, which may contribute to perceptions of work/life balance.

“The pandemic brought us flexible work hours which everyone appreciates.”

—Woman with a mid-level role at an academic institution or library

“Working at home makes for the best work/life balance. Having a four-day work week instead of a five-day (with reduced hours accordingly with no change in pay) would make for even better work/life balance. There’s no need in publishing these days to work 40+ hours/week in a communal office building. There’s just not, and anyone else who tells you differently needs to work on their time management skills.”

—Woman with an intermediate level role at a publisher

Communicating Values

Many respondents (78 percent) are satisfied with their current position, and satisfaction tends to increase as people progress in their career. While 68 percent of respondents in entry-level positions rated their satisfaction highly, 89 percent of respondents in senior or executive-level roles did so.1 A higher proportion of respondents working in non-profit institutions or consulting services rated their satisfaction highly (86 percent and 85 percent, respectively) than respondents who work at publishers, academic institutions, or technology/analytics (79 percent, 76 percent, and 65 percent, respectively).

As in 2018, the majority of people (65 percent) report that they contribute to discussions without hesitation, and this does not vary substantially across the majority of identity groups. The only substantial difference was found within age groups, as 45 percent of respondents ages 16 to 24 reported contributing without hesitation.

Many people continue to benefit from formal and informal mentorship. About half (46 percent) of respondents reported having a mentor at some point in their career. Of those who have had a mentor, the majority (86 percent) reported some measurable impact on their professional growth.

Since 2018, more organizations have communicated their values about diversity. In 2018, 60 percent of survey respondents reported that their organizations have stated values about diversity, and this figure has risen to 89 percent in 2023.

Alongside these valuable improvements to work environments, data also reveals that the experience of workplace culture differs based on demographic group, as illustrated in the subsequent theme.

The Workplace

2. Not everyone experiences tangible improvements in workplace culture and workplace equity efforts

While 89 percent of respondents reported in 2023 that their employer has stated its values about diversity (increase of 29 percentage points compared to 2018), not all employees experience inclusive or supportive work environments.

Respondents in some historically marginalized groups were twice as likely than other respondents to disagree that their employer is committed to advancing inclusion and equity. About one third of disabled and neurodivergent, Black, and non-binary respondent groups disagreed that their employers are committed to creating an inclusive, equitable workplace (35 percent, 29 percent, and 35 percent, respectively). This is especially striking when compared to responses of respective non-marginalized groups, who tend to disagree in smaller numbers (15 percent of non-disabled and non-neurodivergent respondents, 15 percent of White respondents, 17 percent of men, 16 percent of women). In comments, respondents highlighted that they hear about equity in their organization but do not see enough action.

“I find that there is a lot of talk of diversity and inclusivity, but it is still left to individuals to really push if they need assistance and to carve out a space for themselves, and things are not accessible by default. There continues to be a lack of understanding (or willingness to understand, in some cases) and the onus is put onto the disabled person/people to make enough noise for change to occur…”

—Disabled and neurodivergent respondent

“Work has a strong outward-facing commitment about DEI, but in practice I don’t see much meaningful change. There are many ERGs (run by volunteer employees) which are not supported enough and instead their results are used for the business’s gain.”

– Asian woman

Creating Respectful, Supportive Workplaces

Respondent groups who disagree about their employer’s commitment to inclusion and equity might feel this way in part because they tend to experience a less respectful and supportive working environment than other respondent groups. Across all respondents, 84 percent agree that they feel respected and valued in their workplace. Many respondents who are part of historically marginalized populations, though, do not experience similarly inclusive workplace environments. Neurodivergent (81 percent), disabled (78 percent), non-binary or gender diverse (78 percent), multiracial (77 percent), and/or Black (68 percent) respondents had substantially lower rates of agreement compared to the average respondent (Figure 1). When asked about working in a supportive environment, 81 percent of all respondents agreed that their workplace culture is supportive. Those who agreed in substantially lower rates identified as disabled (76 percent), multiracial (74 percent), non-binary or gender diverse (72 percent), neurodivergent (71 percent), and/or Black (63 percent; see Figure 1).

“There is a lot of talk about diversity, but when it comes to inclusion this requires action and these actions are not taken.”

– Non-binary or gender diverse respondent

Figure 1 | Respondents from historically marginalized groups tended to experience less positive workplace culture compared to the average across respondents.

Percent of respondents who strongly agree or agree with each statement

Improving Equity and Opportunity

Although respondents’ perceptions of equitable opportunity for promotion are more favorable than in 2018, biases persist. As in 2018, substantially higher proportions of men (62 percent) than women (50 percent) reported that they believe people of all genders have the same opportunities for promotion (compared to 55 percent of men and 37 percent of women in 2018). However, only 26 percent of non-binary respondents shared those beliefs in the 2023 survey (Figure 2).

Figure 2 | Perceptions of equal promotion opportunities vary by gender identity, suggesting that inequities persist.

“There are equal promotion opportunities for people of all genders.”

Respondents who identified as asexual (54 percent), bisexual (61 percent), pansexual (50 percent), and/or queer (34 percent) agreed at lower rates than heterosexual respondents (63 percent) that people of all sexual orientations have the same opportunities for promotion (Figure 3).

Figure 3 | Perceptions of equal promotion opportunities vary by sexual orientation, suggesting that inequities persist.

Percent of respondents who strongly agree or agree with the statement
“There are equal promotion opportunities for people of all sexual orientations.”

Black respondents had the lowest rate of agreement (17 percent) with the notion that people of all ethnicities have equal opportunities for promotion compared to the remaining racial/ethnic groups, followed by White (39 percent), Latine (41 percent), multiracial (45 percent), and Asian respondents (46 percent, Figure 4).2

Figure 4 | Perceptions of equal promotion opportunities vary by racial and ethnicity groups, suggesting that inequities persist.

Percent of respondents who strongly agree or agree with the statement
“There are equal promotion opportunities for people of all ethnicities.”

The older respondents were, the more likely they were to disagree that people of all ages have equal opportunities for promotion (59 percent of the 65+ group, 56 percent of the 55-64 group, 52 percent of the 45-54 group, 46 percent of the 25-34 group, Figure 5). In 2018, 52 percent of respondents disagreed that people of all ages have equal opportunities in the workplace, and involuntary career breaks were reported to be significantly higher in the 51-65 age group than the lower two age groups, and the 20-35 category did not report any involuntary career breaks.

Figure 5 | Perceptions of equal promotion opportunities vary by demographic groups, suggesting that inequities persist.

Percent of respondents who strongly agree or agree with the statement
“There are equal promotion opportunities for people of all ages.”

3. Key focus areas for improving equity include mentorship and networking opportunities, promotion structures and processes, and supporting employees who return from career breaks.

Inequities persist across the career lifecycle, and action is needed to remove barriers to career progression, to build equitable structures, and to honor diversity.

Similar to 2018, colleagues across the industry value development and training opportunities. Many respondents (78 percent) reported that they had taken part in professional development opportunities. Skills training (73 percent) and DEI training (67 percent) were the most common types of opportunities respondents participated in, followed by personal development (49 percent), certification programs (23 percent), and degree programs (13 percent). The majority of respondents across each geographical region engaged in development and training opportunities.

Access to Mentorship

Formal and informal mentorship has a measurable impact on careers, but mentorship opportunity gaps persist by age group. About half (46 percent) of 1,596 respondents reported having a mentor at some point in time, and 86 percent of them reported that the mentorship experience had a measurable impact on their professional growth. Respondents who have or had a mentor tended to be younger: as the age group increased, the percent reporting having had a mentor decreased (52 percent of 16-24 year olds, 50 percent of 25-24 year olds, 48 percent of 35-44 year olds, etc.; Figure 6).

Figure 6 | The older the age group, the less likely respondents were to have had a mentor at some point in their career.

Percent of respondents who have had a mentor, by age group

Many respondents who are part of one or more historically marginalized groups tended to have had a mentor to support their career growth. Those who identify as Black (57 percent) or multi-racial (60 percent) and women (49 percent) or non-binary (45 percent) were also more likely to report having a mentor than other identity groups. The majority of non-binary respondents (81 percent) had mentorship experiences through a formal program, a substantially greater proportion than women (47 percent) and men (37 percent). These results might reflect a rise in the availability of mentorship programs designed to support and uplift historically marginalized populations in recent years, such as the Society for Scholarly Publishing Mentorship Program, the Association of Learned and Professional Society Publishers’ (ALPSP) International Mentorship Scheme, and International Association of Scientific, Technical, and Medical Publishers’s (STM) mentoring programme.

Compared to other race/ethnicity groups, Latine respondents were the least likely to have had a mentor (37 percent) and the least likely to have served as a mentor (38 percent). With 96 percent of Latine individuals who had mentors reporting some measurable impact on their professional growth, supporting mentorship opportunities for Latine people may help reduce the gap in accessing mentorship opportunities. Most Latine respondents who served as mentors or mentees were in the US and Brazil (71 percent).

“I believe that mentorship is critical for those of us that come from working class (and non-white) backgrounds like myself to gain access to work in scholarly publishing. It became clear to me throughout college, including during my internship with a scholarly publisher, that certain career paths require insider knowledge and guidance that I simply did not have. I am so grateful to my professors, supervisors at my college library job, and internship supervisor who were so willing to give me such knowledge and guidance. You don’t know how to pursue something you know nothing about. I think it is the responsibility of those within the industry to branch outward and provide support to those outside of it.”

— Latine respondent

People who served as mentors tended to be age 55 or older, men, and either White or Asian. Respondents in older age groups were more likely to have served as mentors, with 65 percent of respondents ages 55 or above having served as a mentor compared to 15 percent of 16 to 24 year olds. This is likely because older respondents tend to be further along in their careers.

A higher proportion of men (65 percent) than women (54 percent) reported serving as a mentor, which is incongruous with the gender breakdown of all survey respondents: 21 percent men and 72 percent women. This partially reflects the higher proportions of women in the younger age groups, who might be less likely to have had an opportunity to be a mentor, but may also be due to a higher percentage of men than women and non-binary reporting to be further in their career (more than six years in the publishing industry). Men older than 24 reported higher rates of serving as mentors than women of the same age groups: 7 percent more men among 25-34 year olds, 9 percent more among 35-44 year olds, and 21 percent more men serving as mentors among 45-54 year olds. For people above 55 years old, the difference between men and women serving as mentors was negligible. Around half of all White (53 percent) and Asian (52 percent) respondents reported serving as mentors, and Black respondents were the least likely to have served as mentors (39 percent).

Networking Activities

Networking is a common activity, with 86 percent of respondents having participated in networking activities. 46 percent agreed that networking has advanced their career or benefited them in other ways, compared to 31 percent for whom this was not the case. Networking activities have changed since the COVID-19 pandemic. The most common networking activities were socializing with peers inside and outside their organizations (69 percent of respondents socialized with both groups), though 55 percent of respondents reported that socialization with peers decreased since the COVID-19 pandemic. Over half of respondents (55 percent) networked at in-person conferences, which is three percentage points lower than in 2018. Notably, non-binary respondents were more likely to network in virtual settings (48 percent) than women (36 percent) and men (34 percent), and non-binary respondents were less likely to network at in-person conferences (48 percent) compared to women and men (63 percent and 62 percent respectively).

“...Networking is tough when you’re visibly different/not-cis-het. and the only one in a room. It is difficult to find mentors who understand your experience and particular barriers as a member of a marginalized community.

There are a few people in my organization that I would like to approach for formal or informal mentorship, but the idea of having to explain the barriers that face me as a genderfluid/trans-nb using they/them pronouns, social and generally anxious introverted person to a cis-het-abled person seems insurmountable...”

—Non-binary respondent

Employee resource groups provide a safe space for networking, particularly among Asian and Black respondents. A higher proportion of White respondents reported networking at in-person conferences (63 percent) than respondents of color (58 percent average), who in turn were more likely to have networked within employee resource groups (ERGs)—particularly Asian (38 percent) and Black respondents (32 percent). ERGs are often a refuge for people who belong to historically marginalized populations,3 and they may serve as a psychologically safer space for networking compared to broader industry conferences.

Access to some networking experiences varies by age and job level. As age and job level increase, so does the proportion of respondents who reported networking at in-person conferences. Younger respondents, who tend to be early-career, may face barriers when it comes to attending conferences compared to older respondents, who tend to be in more senior roles. While lower age groups reported no difference in the frequency of their networking activities since the pandemic, up to 72 percent of people aged 55 and older reported networking much less often since the pandemic.

Career breaks continue to have a disproportionate impact on careers. 27 percent of respondents reported that they took an extended leave from their career at some point in time, typically for parental reasons (45 percent) or health reasons (25 percent). Among respondents who reported that their career break had an impact on their career, a higher proportion reported that the career break had a negative impact than a positive one (21 percent and 18 percent, respectively). Women were more likely to experience a negative impact on their career as a result of taking a career break than men and non-binary respondents (Figure 7). The most substantial differences in taking career breaks and being negatively impacted by them occurred within the identity groups of parental status, gender identity, age, disability status, and location.

Figure 7 | Women were more likely to experience a negative impact on their career as a result of taking a career break than men and non-binary or gender diverse respondents.

Percent of respondents

Women were more likely to take a career break than other respondents.

Did the career break have a positive of negative or other impact on respondents’ career?

4. Words into action: the future of workplace equity requires organizational and personal accountability

Recommendations for organization and team leaders

Organization leaders and team leaders can benefit from practicing transparency about the current state of equity and goals for everyone to strive for.

• (Re-)assess where the organization or team is on its workplace equity journey. Create a workplace equity strategy to map progress long-term. This can be done through a combination of self-assessments, employee surveys or focus groups, and external workplace equity indices such as the Advancement Inclusion Index, Corporate Equality Index, or the Disability Equality Index. For additional guidance on an assessment process, see the Antiracism Toolkit for Organizations. If your organization or department has a mature workplace equity program, periodic reassessment of progress can help determine whether any course-corrections are needed to meet long-term goals.

• Set goals and align workplace equity initiatives to meet those goals. Within an equity strategy, set concrete goals and assign specific initiatives based on available resources to contribute to those goals. Then determine a list of outcomes that could reasonably result from the initiative. To understand the extent to which workplace equity initiatives are influencing workplace culture and practice, measure the extent to which initiatives are demonstrating desired outcomes. This may require collecting data from multiple sources, so it can be helpful to work with a program evaluation team or specialist. While some initiatives such as aspirational gender or race/ethnicity goals may require periodic monitoring, other initiatives such as a mentoring program may require an in-depth evaluation of the program’s success.

• Recognize and reward employees for their contributions to advancing equity in the workplace. Employees who are part of marginalized communities can face a burden to lead diversity, equity, and inclusion initiatives that they should be benefiting from. It’s important that employees are recognized and not overloaded with the charge to improve workplace equity without adequate resources and support. For more information, read the 4-part blog series in The Scholarly Kitchen about the impact of diversity tax and recommendations for allies and managers to reduce the burden of diversity tax.

• Communicate actions, including progress updates and course-corrections. To reduce perceptions of performative commitment to workplace equity, organization leaders and managers must more intentionally communicate actions they are taking that align with stated values.

• Look across the industry for resources to support your goals. Access the C4DISC Toolkits for Equity and consider joining C4DISC as a member or partner organization.

Recommendations for individual change-makers

Personal commitment is key to showing up as an advocate and ally.

• Support peers in their early career through mentorship or networking. Effective mentorship programs can lead to more diverse management teams. Create formal mentorship programs and highlight mentorship as part of organizational values and expectations. Consider reverse mentoring programs to allow those in historically privileged positions (e.g. White employees and those in leadership) to learn from those who have experienced racialized interactions and biases.

• Contribute to ERGs. If you have access to one or more ERGs, use these groups to actively support and advocate for historically marginalized groups as an ally or community member.

• Level-up your everyday allyship actions. As shared in the C4DISC Antiracism Toolkit for Allies, consider how you employ active listening, respond to criticism, identify and address social segregation, interrupt racism and other discriminatory practices, and contribute to a culture of appreciation and growth.

• Be mindful of your use of inclusive language. Refer to the Guidelines on Inclusive Language and Images in Scholarly Communication for specific examples and recommendations on a variety of topics.