Copyright Page
IMF POLICY PAPER
2022–2023 DIVERSITY & INCLUSION REPORT
June 2024
IMF staff regularly produces papers proposing new IMF policies, exploring options for reform, or reviewing existing IMF policies and operations. The following documents have been released and are included in this package:
A Press Release summarizing the views of the Executive Board as expressed during its February 20 consideration of the staff report.
The Staff Report, prepared by IMF staff and completed on January 24, 2024 for the Executive Board’s consideration on February 20, 2024.
A Staff Supplement or Staff Statement.
The IMF’s transparency policy allows for the deletion of market-sensitive information and premature disclosure of the authorities’ policy intentions in published staff reports and other documents.
Electronic copies of IMF Policy Papers are available to the public from
http://www.imf.org/external/pp/ppindex.aspx
International Monetary Fund
Washington, D.C.
© 2024 International Monetary Fund
Press Release
PR24/245
Press Release—IMF Executive Board Discusses the FY 2022–FY 2023 Diversity and Inclusion Report
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
Washington, D.C. – June 27, 2024: Today, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) released its FY 2022–FY 2023 Diversity and Inclusion Report. The report was discussed by the IMF’s Executive Board on February 20, 2024. The final version of the report reflects the inputs from the Board’s discussions.
Background
The biennial report is prepared by the IMF’s Diversity and Inclusion Office in consultation with the Diversity and Inclusion Council. The Council is a Fund-wide representative body that provides guidance to management, department heads, and departmental Diversity Reference Groups on diversity-related matters. The report is published every two years and provides an overview of the institution’s efforts to promote a more diverse and inclusive working environment for all employees.
Executive Board Assessment [1]
Directors welcomed the comprehensive and insightful report. While recognizing the primacy of professional excellence in the recruitment and promotion of staff, they strongly supported the diversity and inclusion agenda, and commended the substantial, albeit uneven, progress achieved over the past decade in enhancing gender and geographical diversity among Fund staff, including at the managerial level. They expected the Fund to become a leading institution in terms of diversity and inclusiveness of staff over the next decade. However, while acknowledging the aspirational nature of the FY2025 benchmarks in principle, they were concerned that four out of eight will not be achieved, and noted that meeting the regional URR benchmarks does not capture differences in representation across countries within the region. Directors urged intensified efforts to achieve these targets as soon as practicable, including via the action roadmap for the next two years.
Directors emphasized that a more diverse workforce is fundamental to the ability of the Fund to provide high-quality and innovative analysis, advice, and capacity development in a way that gains maximum traction with its membership. Thus, they called for greater ambition by the Fund to instill a culture where diversity and inclusion is valued by staff, managers, and leaders for the benefit of staff at all grade levels. They encouraged staff to continue to raise awareness of the benefits of diversity and inclusion through additional training.
Directors raised concerns that the Fund is only on track to meet half of its FY2025 benchmarks, and that it is not expected to meet either of the gender-based benchmarks, nor meet URR managerial benchmarks for MENA+ and Sub-Saharan Africa staff. They regretted that recruitment for the augmentation priority areas has not contributed to an increase in diversity so far. Directors noted the lower-than-average promotion rate for URR men and women, low shares of women and URR staff in managerial grades, and limited progress with the share of women at the individual contributor (IC) level and called for deeper analysis of the internal and external factors that hinder progress in these areas, together with steps to strengthen the pipeline of women and URR staff for managerial positions.
While recognizing the substantial challenges associated with reaching the remaining benchmarks by FY2025, Directors stressed the importance of maintaining aspirational and ambitious targets as an important signal of the Fund’s commitment to making progress towards these targets, rather than lowering or extending existing targets to align with current trends. Many Directors objected to extending the missed benchmarks until 2030. Directors called for a careful consideration of options by the 2030 Benchmarks Working Group. They also encouraged steps to continue to refine the D&I benchmarks, including their granularity, noting differences within regional benchmarks.
A number of Directors called for consideration of broader aspects of diversity than gender and nationality, such as religion, culture, race, sexual orientation, socio-economic background, age, and gender identity. Directors welcomed the discussion on staff with disabilities in the report, and the deeper analysis currently underway to provide a holistic picture and foster a more inclusive environment. They emphasized the importance of creating an inclusive environment which values and integrates differing views, workstyles, cultural norms, skills, and competencies. Directors urged steadfast implementation of the Racial Equity and Justice Advisory Group (REJAG)’s recommendations to reduce the perception of bias.
Directors underscored the importance of a robust accountability framework for managers that provides oversight over all the four key activities (recruitment, appraisal, promotion, separation) that impact diversity, to ensure the priority actions to address the gaps are effectively implemented. Acknowledging the need to address various obstacles to recruitment of diverse staff, such as limited candidate pools, competition from other IFIs and the private sector, and G-4 visa restrictions for certain groups, they emphasized the importance of making greater efforts to attract and retain people with diverse educational backgrounds, linguistic skills, and practical professional experiences, including by increased cooperation with other multilateral institutions to learn from their best practices.
Directors welcomed the expansion of recruitment efforts in URRs, including in high quality universities in different regions. They considered that the lack of heterogeneity in educational and professional background could be a root cause of the lack of overall diversity at the Fund.
Directors called for an increase in gender diversity at the Board and regretted the lack of progress on this front. They strongly supported ongoing efforts by the Working Group on Gender Diversity of the Executive Board and called on all members of the Executive Board to work with their authorities to raise diversity at the Board.
Title page
2022–2023 DIVERSITY & INCLUSION REPORT
January 24, 2024
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Diversity has been integral to the Fund since its inception1 and an established priority for almost 30 years. In 1995, the then Managing Director created the role of Special Advisor on Diversity, and the following year issued a statement and action plan on “Measures to Promote Staff Diversity and Address Discrimination”. In 2002, a working group was constituted to consider diversity benchmarks, resulting in the first framework in 2003. The Fund has a 20-year history of benchmarks which has ensured progress is made in both gender and regional representation. While benchmarks are important to maintain progress, they are not an end in themselves, but rather a tool through which the Fund can better represent and serve its membership.
The Fund has become a more diverse institution in terms of gender and geographical composition. At end FY 2023, women represented 48 percent of the total workforce (staff and contractual employees with contracts greater than a year), while nationals from the three underrepresented regions (URRs) accounted for 32 percent. This represents an increase from a decade ago, when the corresponding shares of women and URR were 40 percent and 25 percent, respectively. At senior management level (B4 and B5 grades), the representation of women has more than doubled to 39 percent, as has that of URR staff to 17 percent.
The 2025 Benchmarks were ambitious since the targets at managerial levels were increased significantly compared to previous frameworks. Based on current trends, we are on track to meet four out of the eight benchmarks and achieve between 80 and 90 percent of the remaining four, the majority of which are for managerial roles. This largely reflects the impact of internal promotions on diversity in managerial levels.
Diversity policies have moved the Fund closer to the managerial benchmarks, particularly for non-URR women, but with limited promotion space it takes time to make progress. Analysis by Research (RES) and Human Resources (HRD) departments examines the link between diversity characteristics, promotions of economists and the impact of policy changes. It finds that while the overall promotion rate fell since 2015, the promotion rates rose for non-URR women relative to non-URR men but also contributed to substantial variance in the promotion rates across different groups.
The risks of not meeting the 2025 diversity benchmarks relate to potential impacts on reputation, recruitment, retention, and morale. Insufficient diversity can pose challenges in attracting and recruiting future diverse staff. Broad representation in terms of gender and nationality can help ensure that Fund policy advice is robust, evenhanded, and credible. While separations from the Fund remain comparatively low, the focus on meeting the benchmarks is causing a perception of reduced career development opportunities among non-under-represented groups. Achieving the benchmarks, in the remaining timeframe, requires extreme measures, related to longer time to promotions for non-diverse staff, that risk increasing the perception of inequitable treatment and would adversely impact morale, cohesion, motivation, retention and support for future D&I initiatives. Several risk treatments to support diversity in recruitment, build diverse experienced pipelines for managerial positions in all career streams, and address the perception of adverse impact, are proposed to mitigate these risks. Furthering diversity is a process which takes time; and a considered approach with these actions will sustain progress.
The 2030 Benchmarks Working Group will be constituted in early FY 2025 with the goal of making recommendations on the 2030 benchmarks by early FY 2026. The Working Group will consider factors that are likely to continue to impact the Fund’s ability to achieve the benchmarks. These factors include the shares of female graduates with PhDs in macroeconomics and degrees in areas such as IT, which remain well below the Fund’s 50 percent recruitment target, the increased competition for the same pool of talent from other IFIs and the private sector, the scarcity of diverse candidates in the augmentation areas (climate, digital money) and critically the G-4 visa constraints that limit the Fund’s ability to recruit talent from certain regions. It is also important to consider the resulting impact of setting more ambitious benchmarks on non-diverse groups. Rather than raising the targets, when they are not yet met, the Working Group will examine extending the timeline of the existing benchmarks to 2030 and consider appropriate risk acceptance/tolerance levels.
Diversity has to be accompanied by inclusivity and the Fund has introduced measures to improve accountability for achieving results. Over the last two decades, the Diversity & Inclusion (D&I) focus has moved from almost exclusively gender and regional representation to offering all staff an inclusive work environment, where differing views, workstyles, cultural norms, skills, and competencies are accepted and valued. Leveraging a fully inclusive and equitable work environment allows the Fund to better serve its member countries. The report expands on actions taken to improve inclusion and equity in the Fund, including raising awareness, implementing actions to respond to the 2021 D&I Survey, racial equity, and operationalizing a broad inclusion index to assess the Fund’s progress against other organizations. Assessing the accessibility and inclusion gaps for staff with disabilities and those who are caregivers of people with disabilities, has been added to the D&I portfolio. A report with recommendations from an external consultant will be presented to Management in the coming months. The recommendations will need to be costed and fit within the resources and budget constraints, which may entail cuts in other programs to accommodate them.
The Fund is fully committed to closing gaps to the benchmarks and promoting greater inclusion through a two-year roadmap of actions. The actions fall into four broad areas: recruitment, talent development, equity & inclusion, and accountability & transparency. Where possible, initiatives have been aligned with either those already identified in the broader HR strategy, or with other ongoing programs such as implementation plans related to the Institutional Safeguards Review, the Racial Equity and Justice Advisory Group, and the 2021 D&I Survey. In addition, and considering the current global environment, the Fund will need to monitor and, where necessary, address emerging concerns related to antisemitism, islamophobia, and harassment based on nationality and religion.
Approved By
Catriona Purfield
Jointly prepared by Petra de Bruxelles and Roberto Guimarães-Filho (HRD) with contributions from Ahmed Reid, Iamaris Malvestiti, Julian Lee, Marwa Jazi (all HRD), Christian Bogmans, Divya Kirti, Evgenia Pugacheva (all RES), and Tingyun Chen (ORM).
Contents
INTRODUCTION
AN INCREASINGLY DIVERSE WORKFORCE
A. Gender
B. Under-Represented Regions
C. Initiatives to Increase Representation
D. Recruitment—Outreach and Pipeline Building
E. Promotions
F. Overall Assessment of Progress and Challenges
RECRUITMENT AND PROMOTIONS—TRENDS AND PROJECTIONS
A. Recruitment
B. Promotions to Managerial Roles
C. Efforts Required to Meet the 2025 Diversity Benchmarks
ENTERPRISE RISK ASSESSMENT
A. Human Capital Risk
B. Risk Treatments
INCLUSION, EQUITY, AND ACCOUNTABILITY
A. Inclusion & Equity
B. Strengthening Accountability
CONCLUSION AND ROADMAP FOR NEXT TWO YEARS
BOXES
1. Fund Diversity Policies, Diversity Characteristics, and Economist Promotions
2. Key Findings—2022 Staff Engagement Survey—Inclusion Index
FIGURES
1. Diversity Benchmarks—A Summary 2003–-2023
2. Institutional Goals, FY 2013–FY 2023
3. Representation in Senior Leadership, FY 2013–FY 2023
4. Representation of Women, FY 2013–FY 2023
5. Representation of Staff from URR, FY 2013–FY 2023 (Individual Contributors)
6. Representation of Staff from URR, FY 2013–FY 2023 (Managers)
7. A9-B Level Pipeline, FY 2023
8. External Recruitment of A9-B5 Level SCS by Gender and Region, FY 2021–FY 2023
9. External Recruitment of A9–B5 Level Economists by Gender and Region, FY 2021–FY 2023
10. Average Rate of Promotions from A14–A15 for Economists by Gender FY 2021–FY 2023
11. Average Rate of Promotions from A15–B1 for Economists by Gender FY 2021–FY 2023
12. Average Rate of Promotions from A14 and A15 to B1 SCS by Gender FY 2021–FY 2023
13. Average Rate of Promotions from A14–A15 for Economists by Region FY 2021–FY 2023
14. Average Rate of Promotions from A14 and A15 to B1 for SCS by Region FY 2021–FY 2023
15. Hiring Gap vs. Implied Share of Recruitments
16. Implied Rates of Promotion
17. Share of Women on the Executive Boards at IFIs, OECD, and WTO Compared to the WB
18. Departmental Diversity at a Glance at end-FY 2023
TABLES
1. 2008 Benchmarks & Status at end 2003
2. Progress Towards FY 2025 Benchmarks at end FY 2023
3. 2021 D&I Fund-Wide Survey Implementation Action Plan-Status
4. REJAG Implementation Plan—Status
5. Action Roadmap for the Next Two Years
ANNEXES
I. List of Under-Represented Region Countries
II. Fund Diversity Policies, Diversity Characteristics, and Economist Promotions
III. Diversity Reference Group Activities
IV. Staff Engagement Survey – Inclusion Index Questions and Scores
V. Data Tables
Glossary
| AF | Accountability Framework |
| AFR | African Department |
| A&I | Accessibility and Inclusion |
| A&I OC | Accessibility and Inclusion Oversight Committee |
| APD | Asia & Pacific Department |
| APR | Annual Performance Review |
| ASEAN+3 | Association of East Asian Nations plus 3 (China, Japan, and Korea) |
| COM | Communications Department |
| CSF | Corporate Services and Facilities Department |
| DDC | Deputy Division Chief |
| D, E, & I | Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion |
| D&I | Diversity and Inclusion |
| DRG | Diversity Reference Group |
| EA | East Asia Region also sometimes referred to as ASEAN+3 |
| EC | Economist Committee |
| ED | Executive Director |
| EDGE | Economic Dividends for Gender Equality |
| EP | Economist Program |
| ERG | Employee Resource Group |
| ERM | Enterprise Risk Management |
| ETO | Ethics Office |
| EUR | European Department |
| FAD | Fiscal Affairs Department |
| FIN | Finance Department |
| FIP | Fund Internship Program |
| FY | Financial Year |
| HQ | Headquarters |
| HRD | Human Resources Department |
| HRD/DIV | Human Resources Department/Diversity & Inclusion Office |
| HRD/TM | Human Resources Department/Talent Management Division |
| ICs | Individual Contributors in grades A9-A14/15 (including senior economists and senior officers) |
| ICD | Institute for Capacity Development |
| IFIs | International Financial Institutions |
| IG | Institutional Goals |
| IMF | International Monetary Fund |
| IRC | Institutional Review Committee |
| ISR | Institutional Safeguards Review |
| IT | Information Technology |
| ITD | Information Technology Department |
| KPIs | Key Performance Indicators |
| KRIs | Key Risk Indicators |
| LEG | Legal Department |
| MCD | Middle East and Central Asia Department |
| MCM | Monetary and Capital Markets Department |
| MENA+ | Middle East & North Africa Region plus Afghanistan, Djibouti, Pakistan, Somalia, and Sudan |
| OBP | Office of Budget & Planning |
| OIA | Office of Internal Audit |
| OMD | Office of the Managing Director |
| ORM | Office of Risk Management |
| RA | Research Assistant |
| RAP | Research Assistant Program |
| RC | Review Committee |
| REJAG | Racial Equity and Justice Advisory Group |
| RES | Research Department |
| SCS | Specialized Career Stream |
| SEC | Secretary’s Department |
| SES | Staff Engagement Survey |
| SMART | Specific, Measurable, Achievable, Relevant, and Time-Bound |
| SPR | Strategy, Planning, & Review Department |
| SRC | Senior Review Committee |
| SSA | Sub-Saharan Africa Region |
| STA | Statistics Department |
| TRM | Office of Transformation Management |
| URR | Under-represented Region |
| WG | Working Group |
| WHD | Western Hemisphere Department |
An explanation of any qualifiers used in summing up can be found here: http://www.imf.org/external/np/sec/misc/qualifiers.htm.
Article XII Section 4(d) of the Articles of Agreement, included in the Articles since they entered into force in 1945: “In appointing the staff, the Managing Director shall, subject to the paramount importance of securing the highest standards of efficiency and technical competence, pay due regard to the importance of recruiting personnel on as wide a geographical basis as possible.”
