Why DEI efforts in Singapore risk falling short: university professor

The push for inclusive workplaces has led to widespread DEI adoption, but is there meaningful change? Dr. Wang Pengji of James Cook University weighs in

Why DEI efforts in Singapore risk falling short: university professor

Singapore has taken clear steps to promote workplace fairness, with national efforts led by the Tripartite Alliance for Fair and Progressive Employment Practices (TAFEP), the Fair Consideration Framework, and the upcoming Workplace Fairness Legislation.

These efforts have pushed companies to formalise diversity, equity and inclusion (DEI) policies across the board.

While companies can comply with guidelines and deliver on surface-level metrics, inclusion in practice often remains limited.

Mandatory training, quotas, or diversity statements may exist, but the impact on culture and day-to-day decision-making is not always clear.

To understand how organisations can close this gap, HRD Asia spoke with Dr. Wang Pengji, associate professor at James Cook University.

Compliance alone doesn’t shift behaviour

Wang credits Singapore’s policy frameworks for establishing minimum standards. However, she warns that policy-driven inclusion often creates the illusion of progress.

“You can remove age or race requirements from job ads, or achieve board diversity on paper, but that doesn’t mean those voices are heard or included,” she says.

“It becomes window dressing without real change.”

One issue is the perception of DEI as a procedural task. “When people see DEI as something they have to do, not something they believe in, it becomes a burden. That can backfire,” she says.

“Mandatory training may feel like an accusation. Promotions may be seen as unearned. That damages trust and morale.”

Metrics without insight

Wang recently collaborated with the Singapore Institute of Directors to study the board-level diversity of listed companies.

She found signs of progress: female representation rose from 8 to 17 percent between 2020 and 2023, and tenure diversity also improved. However, ethnic diversity declined during the same period.

Many firms also reported hiring from underrepresented groups or offering inclusive training programs. But these efforts often stop short of tracking what happens next.

“We don’t know how many employees from minority groups are retained or promoted. We don’t know if the training reaches people across departments or job levels. And without that, we can’t say what the real impact is,” she says.

This lack of outcome-based measurement contributes to growing skepticism.

“When you can’t show clear value, people start to ask whether DEI brings any return on investment. And that’s when we see companies start to pull back.”

Why DEI training fails without culture

For companies that do invest in DEI, Wang sees another gap. “Many take a top-down approach. They implement what everyone else is doing without consulting their people or aligning with their own strategy,” she says.

Standardised practices, like anonymous CV screening, inclusive hiring panels and compulsory DEI training, are often introduced with little adaptation. Yet these tools may not always address what employees actually experience.

“DEI is part of your culture. And culture doesn’t come from a one-day training. It comes from what people believe and how systems reinforce those beliefs,” she explains.

Integrating DEI into performance reviews

Wang believes performance reviews are a missed opportunity to reinforce inclusive culture. While some HR teams are evaluated on DEI targets, these measures often don’t extend across departments.

“In most organisations, performance is still measured by outcomes like sales targets or client satisfaction. DEI-related behaviour is rarely part of the evaluation,” she says.

She recommends using behavioural feedback tools, such as 360-degree reviews, to better capture how managers build inclusive environments. “It’s difficult to quantify, but we can still create accountability through feedback and consistency.”

Without structural alignment, even well-intended measures can backfire. “Flexible work is one example. If taking it impacts your performance rating or slows down your team, then it’s not truly accessible,” she says.

Subtle forms of workplace exclusion

Wang points to daily behaviours that often go unreported but shape workplace experience. These include interrupting colleagues during meetings, making offhand comments about someone’s language skills, or excluding individuals from informal decision-making spaces.

“Sometimes women are on the board but not in the room where informal conversations happen. Sometimes older workers are assumed to be less tech-savvy. These are real, but hard to track,” she says.

Because such acts may not clearly violate policy, employees are often unsure whether to speak up. “In harmony-based cultures, people are also reluctant to raise concerns. That makes these issues even harder to address.”

Why psychological safety is not enough

While psychological safety is essential, Wang notes it is only the starting point.

“Feeling safe to speak up is important. But if your contributions are ignored, or if you are not recognised or promoted fairly, then you’re still excluded,” she explains.

She highlights the gap between being allowed to contribute and being valued for that contribution. “Safety without belonging, visibility and equity still leaves people feeling disconnected.”

Cultural adaptation matters

Wang has studied how Western DEI models translate in Asia. In countries like the United States, race often dominates the conversation. In Singapore, ethnic identity, religion, age, and gender may be more pressing concerns.

“What works in one context doesn’t always apply in another. Singapore companies need to understand which groups face barriers, and what inclusion looks like for them,” she says.

For example, some companies offer prayer rooms to meet religious needs. Others provide flexible work to support caregiving. In contrast, gender quotas—common in Western countries—may be seen as inappropriate or ineffective in some Asian cultures.

She shares the case of Singtel, which regularly surveys employees on their sense of inclusion and publishes the results. “They listen to their people, and that’s reflected in both sentiment and performance.”

Wang also highlights a small Australian company operating in Singapore. “They didn’t have a DEI policy. But they offered flexible work to parents, travel opportunities to those who value networking, and extra leave to those who preferred time off. When I told them they were doing DEI, they were surprised. To them, it was just their culture.”

Where HR leaders should begin

When HR leaders say they have implemented DEI programs but see no change, Wang encourages them to ask whose experience they used to shape those efforts.

“Did you talk to employees? Or did the plans come from the top?” she says.

She recommends beginning with onboarding and recruitment. “It’s not just about filtering candidates. It’s about making your values clear and ensuring alignment. Candidates are also choosing you.”

She adds that DEI must be seen as a continuous process. “Employees need a shift. What works this year may not be relevant next year. You need to listen, evaluate and adjust.”

Finally, she emphasises the role of managers. “Top leaders set direction, but middle managers create daily experience. Equip them with the tools, coaching, and clarity they need. They are the ones who bring culture to life.”