Transparency About Lagging Diversity Numbers Signals Genuine Progress

Numerous organizations pledge to increase diversity, yet few publicly disclose how diverse they are. We suggest this reluctance to be transparent stems from an intuitive (albeit often misplaced) psychological calculation: that revealing struggles to increase diversity will undermine one's credibility and reputation. We evaluate the effects of transparency about lagging diversity numbers across four preregistered studies (n = 4,483), using real EEO-1 diversity disclosures from S&P 100 companies (Study 1) and information about the representation of racial/ethnic minorities in participants' own organizations (Studies 2-4). Contrary to conventional wisdom and related research on impression management in organizations, we observe that transparency about unfavorable diversity outcomes signals the genuineness of one's commitment to diversity and thus increases perceptions of progress and trustworthiness. This research importantly synthesizes and extends scholarship on intergroup relations and self-disclosure and further suggests that, in some cases, the utility of transparency for managing diversity is misunderstood. Public Significance Statement There is a growing tension in organizations' public commitments to diversity: scores of organizations pledge to increase the diversity of their workforce, yet few disclose how diverse they are. Because many organizations struggle to increase diversity, they likely fear that such transparency will harm their reputation. We examine the effects of being transparent versus silent about lagging diversity numbers. Contrary to conventional wisdom and related research on impression management in organizations, we find that transparency (vs. silence) about lagging diversity numbers is often more effective for sustaining a positive reputation because it signals that the organization's commitment to diversity is genuine versus merely "lip service." We observe strong evidence that transparency about unfavorable diversity numbers increases perceptions of progress and trustworthiness, and some evidence that it stimulates individuals to promote organizations' diversity efforts to others. This research suggests that leaders' intuitions about the reputational costs of transparency regarding lagging diversity numbers may be misplaced.