In 2018, Erica Coletta became Mars Petcare's Chief Human Resources Officer, and immediately found herself dealing with high-stakes inclusion and diversity issues. U.S. employees especially were ready for substantive action after unprecedented racial justice protests, and its 100,000 employees across six continents eagerly awaited next steps from previous commitments to equity in hiring and management. How could she effectively capitalize on the energy for change?

To become more diverse, equitable, and inclusive, many companies have turned to unconscious bias (UB) training. By raising awareness of the mental shortcuts that lead to snap judgment--often based on race and gender--about people's talents or character, it strives to make hiring and promotion fairer and improve interactions with customers and among colleagues. But most UB training is ineffective, research shows. The problem is, increasing awareness is not enough--and can even backfire--because sending the message that bias is involuntary and widespread may make it seem unavoidable. UB training that gets results, in contrast, teaches attendees to manage their biases, practice new behaviors, and track their progress. It gives them information that contradicts stereotypes and allows them to connect with colleagues whose experiences are different from theirs. And it's not a onetime session; it entails a longer journey and structural organizational changes. In this article the authors describe how rigorous UB programs at Microsoft, Starbucks, and other organizations help employees overcome denial and act on their awareness, develop the empathy that combats bias, diversify their networks, and commit to improvement.

Massachusetts General Brigham (MGB) Chief Innovation Officer Christopher Coburn had overseen a period of exciting transformation and growth in healthcare innovation at MGB. In November 2019, the health system was the largest recipient of National Institutes of Health (NIH) funding in the world. The Innovation Office sought to capitalize on that funding. Their team aimed to help the organization's 3,505 Principal Investigators translate and commercialize their research, with the goal of both producing revenue and improving patient care. Despite the success of Coburn and the Innovation Office over the last decade, MGB CEO Anne Klibanski and other key stakeholders had a serious concern. Although women comprised approximately 40% of the medical researchers and physicians it employed, the percentage of women participating in innovation activities lagged behind--in some categories, by a ratio of 4:1. Coburn knew that change would require an understanding of the main sources of disparities, the right strategy to address those disparities, and an equally robust execution. How could MGB expand and diversify its community of innovators?

On April 12, 2018, two African American entrepreneurs had scheduled a business meeting at a Starbucks in Philadelphia's Rittenhouse Square neighborhood. They sat without ordering, waiting for a local businessman to show up for the meeting. The store manager called 911 on them, despite the fact that they were behaving neither violently nor disruptively. When the police arrived soon after the call, they arrested the young men. The incident was viewed by the Starbucks' leadership team, including the CEO, as "a disheartening situation" and, in the words of John Kelly, the company's Senior VP of Public Affairs and Social Impact, "a profound failure to live up to our ideals and a violation of our values." Starbucks, which employed around 175,000 individuals nationwide and served more than 4 million customers daily in its approximately 8,000 U.S. stores, strived to abide by its mission statement: "...To inspire and nurture the human spirit, one cup, one person, one neighborhood at a time." The case describes how the company and its leadership responded to the crisis. To react to the incident, the leadership decided to close down its stores for a day of unconscious bias training, aimed at raising awareness of racial bias and discrimination in particular. The company also started a journey of providing more training and development for the partners, to assure that they lived by the company values on a daily basis, and revised store policy that, the leadership believed, contributed to how the store managers and employees in the Rittenhouse Square store behaved back in April 2018. As the case closes, CEO Kevin Johnson reflects on how he could assure that every Starbucks employee not only understood the company mission and values, but truly connected to them emotionally and carry them out daily in their work.

In 2018, Lindsay Kaplan is preparing to meet with Carolyn Childers about the possibility of co-founding Chief, a New York-based peer network for women executives. Kaplan is currently the vice president of communications and brand engagement at a successful mattress company, and she is happy in her current role. However, she is excited by Childers's vision for a community of women executives and believes she could bring valuable expertise as Chief builds its brand experience. Should Kaplan join Chief as a co-founder? What do they need to discuss before teaming up?

Chief is a New York-based peer network that provides mentorship, support, networking opportunities, and a sense of community to women executives. Co-founders Carolyn Childers and Lindsay Kaplan launched the company in January 2019, and just two months later, Chief has 400 members and a growing waiting list. Now, Childers and Kaplan must determine how aggressively to scale Chief's model to other cities. How much money should they raise in Chief's Series A, and when? Which cities should they expand to first? What are the potential risks of moving too fast, and how can they best mitigate them? For more background on Childers and Kaplan's decision to found Chief, please see "Chief: Role for Carolyn Childers" (HBS No. 920-019) and "Chief: Role for Lindsay Kaplan" (HBS No. 920-020).

"The Boss Has the Wrong Idea" is a two-person conversation exercise in which an MBA student seeks advice from a mentor in her field about how to handle an incident of workplace sexual harassment. The case consists of two confidential role materials: a role for the student, Julia, which describes her troubling experience with her boss during a summer internship, and a role for the senior mentor, Lee, which mentions that Julia is hoping to receive advice from him about a complicated situation. Julia's story presents a richly detailed, first-hand (fictionalized) account of a young woman's experience in a male-dominated, competitive firm. Her narrative provides a compelling representation of the nuances and challenges associated with experiencing sexual harassment in the workplace. Because it is written as a conversation exercise, the case provides students, faculty, and administrators with not only the opportunity to think about how to address (and prevent) sexual harassment within their own organizations, but also with the opportunity to engage in the difficult conversations that these issues demand. How can we best offer support and guidance? What are strategies for effective listening, question asking, and advice-giving in emotionally-charged and sensitive situations?

"The Boss Has the Wrong Idea" is a two-person conversation exercise in which an MBA student seeks advice from a mentor in her field about how to handle an incident of workplace sexual harassment. The case consists of two confidential role materials: a role for the student, Julia, which describes her troubling experience with her boss during a summer internship, and a role for the senior mentor, Lee, which mentions that Julia is hoping to receive advice from him about a complicated situation. Julia's story presents a richly detailed, first-hand (fictionalized) account of a young woman's experience in a male-dominated, competitive firm. Her narrative provides a compelling representation of the nuances and challenges associated with experiencing sexual harassment in the workplace. Because it is written as a conversation exercise, the case provides students, faculty, and administrators with not only the opportunity to think about how to address (and prevent) sexual harassment within their own organizations, but also with the opportunity to engage in the difficult conversations that these issues demand. How can we best offer support and guidance? What are strategies for effective listening, question asking, and advice-giving in emotionally-charged and sensitive situations?

Legal Time is a two-party dynamic negotiation simulation. Students take the role of either the prosecution or the defense in a case that centers on a client who has been accused of spear-heading a conspiracy to commit wire fraud. This conflict-resolution scenario gives students the opportunity to see how their negotiations are influenced by important situational and behavioral factors - specifically, (i) fairness considerations and self-serving motives, (ii) time pressure, and (iii) learning from one's own experience and the experiences of others.

Legal Time is a two-party dynamic negotiation simulation. Students take the role of either the prosecution or the defense in a case that centers on a client who has been accused of spear-heading a conspiracy to commit wire fraud. This conflict-resolution scenario gives students the opportunity to see how their negotiations are influenced by important situational and behavioral factors - specifically, (i) fairness considerations and self-serving motives, (ii) time pressure, and (iii) learning from one's own experience and the experiences of others.

Legal Time is a two-party dynamic negotiation simulation. Students take the role of either the prosecution or the defense in a case that centers on a client who has been accused of spear-heading a conspiracy to commit wire fraud. This conflict-resolution scenario gives students the opportunity to see how their negotiations are influenced by important situational and behavioral factors - specifically, (i) fairness considerations and self-serving motives, (ii) time pressure, and (iii) learning from one's own experience and the experiences of others.

This case follows Amira Rashad as she founds BulkWhiz, a Dubai-based buy-in-bulk grocery delivery platform. Following its launch in September 2017, BulkWhiz experiences rapid growth of 30 percent per month in the United Arab Emirates. Despite this initial success, Rashad finds herself at a critical juncture just nine months later, with a number of internal and external negotiations awaiting her. First, she is eager to convince her Chief Technology Officer to come on-board full-time, and needs to finalize details on his transition and compensation. Second, she is wrestling with how to expand her business beyond the UAE market. Finally, she is seeking series A fundraising, to fuel the company's growth. How should she approach and sequence these negotiations, and what obstacles might loom?

When Hewlett-Packard Enterprise notified Rhode Island's Governor's Office that it won't be able to deliver a "fully-functioning" technology upgrade for the Department of Motor Vehicles, both parties had reached a breaking point. HPE argued that it would need more money to complete the system, while the Governor's cabinet countered by stating that HPE was violating its contractual obligations. The case covers Rhode Island's perspective of the various moves each side made in preparation for anticipated adjudication.

In the fall of 2016, the Crimson, Harvard's undergraduate newspaper, broke a story revealing that the 2012 Harvard Men's Soccer team had produced a sexually explicit "scouting report" about the Women's Soccer team. The story generated national headlines and thrust gender issues, and the University, into the media spotlight. In the following months, the breadth of this type of practice was revealed; the "scouting reports" had been an annual tradition of the Men's Soccer team, and the Cross Country team admitted to similar practices. This case follows the decision-making of Harvard administrators as they deal with the discovery of the scouting report. In addition to exploring leadership through crisis, the case challenges readers to explore the boundaries of appropriateness in how we think and talk about interpersonal attraction.