Becker's Hospital Review

162 162 THOUGHT LEADERSHIP How AdventHealth's CHRO Olesea Azevedo determines whether diversity and inclusion efforts are real or window dressing By Molly Gamble O lesea Azevedo, senior vice president and chief hu- man resources officer for Altamonte Springs, Fla.-based AdventHealth since 2016, has focused on identifying mean- ingful diversity and inclusion efforts with a passion for ensuring each person is seen and heard for who they are. Ms. Azevedo previously served as vice president of human resources for Florida Blue/Guidewell in Jacksonville, Fla., and before that as as- sistant vice president of HR and employee communication for Baptist Health South Florida in Miami. Here, Becker's Hospital Review caught up with Ms. Azevedo. Editor's note: is interview has been lightly edited for length and style. Question: How do you distinguish needle-moving, suc- cessful diversity efforts from window dressing? What are some "tells" that an effort is rooted in reality and de- signed for results versus virtue signaling? Olesea Azevedo: I think we're all asking ourselves those questions. What really moves the needle, and what do organizations do with good intention but perhaps the outcomes aren't where they need to be? If we look at overall healthcare benchmarks related to minority and gender representation, while we've made progress, the opportu- nity is still significant. I had an opportunity to work outside of healthcare and at one organi- zation where we had a pretty large diversity and inclusion team. When a new CEO was appointed, he reduced the D & I team and le two people. People said, "How could you do that? You don't believe in D & I!" His philosophy was that diversity and inclusion does not belong to any one department — every one is responsible for it. While the D&I team still focused on setting the aspirations and program develop- ment, leaders created experiences for their teams each day that were supportive of those aspirations and goals. Q: So this CEO saw a formalized diversity and inclusion department as a risk, in that other leaders in the organiza- tion may come to think of diversity and inclusion as "that department's job" and not their own. What does it look like when a company treats diversity and inclusion as an organizationwide responsibility? OA: What's window dressing in my mind is a value of diversity and in- clusion that is stated and not lived. When I say lived, to me that looks like every single leader having ownership and responsibility for not just creating a diverse environment from the standpoint of represen- tation, but of inclusivity as well. ose are two very different things. At AdventHealth as we reenergized our culture framework, we updat- ed one of our values from diversity to inclusion. We also created ser- vice standards — keep me safe, make it easy, love me and own it. ese service standards are intended to be lived out in how we interact with each other and consumers. We aspire to show care, compassion and make authentic connections, and as a result, we're going to create not just an incredible environment from an experience standpoint, but one that is diverse and inclusive. What's not window dressing is creating an environment where all leaders own it. at means the culture needs to be support- ive of diversity and inclusion, and there should be associated plans and action items linked to it as well. e right rewards and incen- tives should be in place to help leaders make that part of their daily work and responsibility. AdventHealth has looked at measuring representation in terms of mi- nority and gender for each hospital compared to the community in which it serves. Our incentive at an executive level has been aligned with that measure for many years. It works. Compared to the health- care industry benchmark, our organization has seen positive trends over the last five years, but as our mission calls us, we aim beyond cur- rent benchmarks to ensure representation is reflective of our promise to deliver whole-person care to each person we come in contact with. Q: What is one ineffective method a company can deploy to strengthen gender equity in its recruitment, hiring, pay and/or retention? Can you share an example that shows how or why it falls short? OA: We have wrestled with having a women-only leadership develop- ment program. We have built a Leadership Institute, and with an ex- periential executive leadership program that has 45 to 50 participants annually. We are very thoughtful about having the right mix of par- ticipants in that group, including role, race, gender and more. At the women's leadership forum, we had a robust conversation on whether we should have a women-specific executive leadership program, and we decided not to do it. e executive leadership program requires participants to come to- gether for several days over an 18-month period. It is very intense with significant team work in between. When the first cohort met, we saw women sitting with women and men sitting with men for the first two sessions. On the third session, we were ready to take a photo of the group. e message we had prepared was, "Okay, you have to mix it up." But by the time that photo opportunity arrived, everybody was mixed up. It happened naturally. With the right opportunities to con- nect, those relationships naturally strengthen and advocacy for each other emerges. We have had more than 60 percent of participants in our executive leadership program advance in the organization. We recognize that women do not lead in a bubble. ey lead in a team, and hopefully one that is diverse. We've had women-driven events that have been insightful and supportive. However, we decided to pursue a path where our women leaders are purposefully developed as part of a diverse cohort. n

• Cover