2022 Transparency Report
Race & Ethnicity Detail
We’re on pace to achieve our 2025 goals that mirror the U.S. Census’ representation, and this data shows our biggest area of opportunity is with LatinX or Hispanic identifying employees. Since 2020, we’ve created affinity groups–our internal employee resource that provides a supportive environment to foster awareness, understanding, inclusion, and respect for underrepresented groups within our organization. As we grow our employee base and community belonging, we look forward to expanding all identities within our organization where everyone feels seen, heard, and valued.
Our Progress & Focus Areas
We’re happy with the progress we’ve made since first publishing our data and goals in 2020, and yet, there is more work to do. We are pleased to see such forward progress in our equity and inclusion scores and will continue to focus on initiatives that perpetuate belonging in all aspects of our organization. With our combined representation data and Q2 bi-annual employee engagement survey results, we’ve made strides in our representation data and will continue to evaluate and improve upon those efforts.
Last year, we contributed over $875,000 in pro-bono work through our Build/Grow/Serve program to support and empower Black and underrepresented communities. As an organization, we also donated over $100,000 to 100+ nonprofits and used over 700 hours of volunteer time off collectively. Since 2021, we’ve significantly increased our pro-bono budget and fortified our partner selection process to focus our efforts on singular clients annually and maximize our impact within their organization.
In addition to our external efforts, we’ve increased our internal donation matching budget and giving campaigns so employees feel empowered and supported to help the causes important to them. We’ve also launched a new career progression framework with learning & development stipends across the organization to promote internal growth and career advancement. With collective learning and growth in mind, we embedded daily practices into the foundation of our culture to help achieve our purpose while maintaining our values at every level of the organization. Additionally, we circulate weekly news articles focusing on specific ways racism and systemic oppression persist in society today, along with tangible ways employees can learn more and take action.
We’ve seen positive results from ED&I initiatives implemented in 2020 and beyond, and publishing this data annually helps us track our goals and evaluate things that are working well and areas with room for improvement. We are committed to continuing to analyze and evolve our efforts as we meet the changing needs of the organization while keeping equity, diversity, inclusion, and belonging at the forefront of everything we do.
Data & Definitions
U.S. Census data was sourced from: https://www.census.gov.
Instrument representation data has been sourced from internal EEO reports or confidentially via Instrument People Ops. There is a small percentage (3%) of employees who wish not to specify race and ethnicity data. Percentages are rounded to the nearest full percentage point.
We acknowledge that while demographic figures are vital to our ED&I efforts, they don’t always give the full picture. While we have concerns about the fairness, accuracy, and lack of inclusivity in U.S. Census data, it remains the best data source as a foundational baseline for us to use. Race & Ethnicity reflects the EEO-1 categories required by the U.S. government reports; we understand that these are imperfect categorizations of both race and ethnicity.
Employees are able to voluntarily and confidentially share personal attributes like sexual orientation, disability status, military status, gender identity, or identifying as transgender. This process helps us understand the diversity of employees and ensures that we are making equitable and inclusive decisions.
In the high-level race and ethnicity report, we are using BIPOC (Black, Indigenous, and people of color) in place of the common “Non-White”.
RACE & ETHNICITY
Defined by the US Census Bureau as, the self-identified categories of race or races and ethnicity chosen by residents, with which they most closely identify, and indicate whether they are of Hispanic or Latino origin (the only categories for ethnicity).
In the U.S. Census, people may choose to provide two or more races in a few different ways. "Two or More Races" refers to combinations of two or more of the following race categories: "White," "Black or African American," American Indian or Alaska Native," "Asian," Native Hawaiian or Other Pacific Islander," or "Some Other Race".
Pay Equity FAQ
WHAT DOES THE % MEAN?
The percentages you see represent how far above (positive number) and below (negative number) each identity group’s average pay is from the average for their role level.
WHY DO I SEE N/A IN SOME PLACES?
In order to protect individual privacy, we have chosen not to show data for groups which have less than 3 individuals in them.
WHAT IS A ROLE LEVEL?
In order to balance between maximizing privacy for individuals and providing meaningful data, we have grouped pay bands into “role levels.” Each level consists of multiple pay bands that fall within a close range of years of experience. Essentially, if we didn’t do this, we would have to hide a lot more data to protect individual privacy.
WHAT COUNTS AS PAY?
For this report, only salaries were included. This means annual bonus amounts are not a factor for this report. Including bonuses would force us to exclude anyone who has joined Instrument after the most recent bonus eligibility date (10/1/21).
We would have needed to exclude them because including bonus for some and not for others would render the reporting meaningless. Given that Instrument has grown so significantly in the last year, excluding all our new employees since 10/1/21 would have also rendered the reporting meaningless.
In order to address this, we are planning to time this report closer to the payout of annual bonuses (spring of each year) so that a complete picture of compensation (salary and bonus) can be included.
In order to properly compare the data “apples to apples,” we utilized national pay region data to normalize pay across the organization.
AVERAGE VS. MEDIAN
In our research on pay equity, we noticed that many organizations opt to use either average or median to determine pay equity. We chose average because we believe that it is the best way to identify when pay equity is not being achieved. To understand why we believe this, consider the example below:
In this example, the average pay for Group A is $0.99 and the average pay for Group B is $1.01. Across the entire role, regardless of group, the average is $1.00.
This means that group A is paid $0.01 less than the average. In percentage terms this is 1% below the average (0.01/1.00) and would show as -1% in the chart. Group B is paid $0.01 more than the average and would show as 1% in the chart.