Introduction
Only 2% of UK STEM roles are held by Black professionals. This statistic from the All-Party Parliamentary Group's (APPG) report on diversity in STEM validates experiences I've witnessed throughout my life. As a mixed-race founder, I've observed a pattern: family members from diverse backgrounds with strong STEM skills face barriers that their white British counterparts don't. Those without 'white' names particularly struggle to secure opportunities despite their qualifications.
The APPG's call for a 'STEM Diversity Decade of Action' presents a framework I wish had existed earlier in my life. After navigating overt racism in education from teachers and covert racism in minimum-wage jobs, I've watched unconscious bias evolve while remaining persistent.
What stands out most in the APPG's recommendations is the emphasis on large organisations sharing EDI resources with smaller ones and collecting intersectional data. As someone who chose STEM over arts partly because of its stronger EDI infrastructure, I'm committed to strengthening these supports, particularly for people like me: women, people of colour, those from low socio-economic backgrounds, and those with disabilities or neurodivergence.
1. The Case for Intersectional EDI Data
Beyond Tick-Box Diversity: Why Overlapping Identities Matter
For meaningful progress in diversity, understanding how different aspects of our identities overlap is essential. Advance HE's guide makes clear that single category approaches fail to capture the complexity of real experiences: focusing on just one lens risks overlooking who is being left behind. An intersectional approach combines quantitative and qualitative methods to understand how social categories like gender, ethnicity, disability, and class interact. Qualitative research allows people to share how their identities shape their lives, while quantitative analysis can reveal patterns that single strand metrics miss. This dual approach ensures both personal stories and systemic factors are considered, leading to more effective interventions.
Black women in UK STEM face a "double bind": underrepresented both as women and as Black professionals. This intersection creates unique barriers that neither white women nor Black men experience.
Muslim women face a "triple penalty" of gender, religion, and ethnicity. With only 37% of working age Muslim women employed and just 4% of minority ethnic women in STEM, it's clear that intersecting identities create barriers that single category approaches cannot address. This has been the reality for many in my family. One relative's STEM journey illustrates this: despite their talent, the intersection of socioeconomic status, race, gender, religion, and ethnicity created compounding barriers. Unable to afford unpaid internships and unable to secure paid opportunities, they were forced to pivot away from their true passion.
Eight overlapping circles in different colours representing intersecting identity dimensions: ability, race, class, religion, sexuality, gender, language and ethnicity.
2. Challenges in Gathering & Sharing Data
Privacy vs. Progress: Navigating Institutional Resistance
Despite growing recognition of EDI's importance, significant barriers persist in collecting and sharing diversity data across STEM fields. A major obstacle is fragmented HR systems: many organisations rely on disconnected platforms that fail to communicate, resulting in data silos and inconsistent reporting. Without standardised methods, gaps emerge, progress stalls, and compliance becomes a moving target. As the Institute of Physics notes,
"There is currently no UK-wide, sector-wide or enforceable method for collecting data on the demographics of those working in STEM"
making it difficult to benchmark progress or assess the impact of interventions.
Privacy concerns further complicate matters. Diversity data such as ethnicity, disability, and sexual orientation are classified as 'special category data' under UK GDPR, requiring enhanced protection and careful handling. Many employees worry about who will access their information and how it will be used, with 76% of firms citing employee privacy concerns as a main barrier to data collection. This uncertainty can lead organisations-especially those lacking data protection expertise-to avoid collecting data altogether, leaving systemic inequities unaddressed.
Resource constraints, lack of leadership prioritisation, and limited awareness also hinder progress. Survey fatigue is another challenge: repeated requests for diversity data without visible change can breed scepticism, particularly among underrepresented groups. When trust is lacking, participation dwindles and data quality suffers.
The challenge is not just technical or legal but also cultural. However, solutions exist: anonymised procedures, transparent communication, and sector-wide data dashboards can help turn compliance into genuine inclusion. Overcoming these barriers is essential so individuals with intersecting identities can experience STEM as a space where they truly belong.
3. Breaking Silos: Collaborative Resource Sharing
APPG's Blueprint for Cross-Sector Partnerships
No single institution can solve STEM's diversity challenge alone. Systemic change requires cross-sector collaboration, where organisations openly share resources such as mentorship frameworks, recruitment tools, and data collection methods. This collective approach achieves far greater impact than isolated efforts ever could.
This philosophy aligns with the Campaign for Science and Engineering (CaSE), which has long argued that diversity must sit at the heart of STEM policy. As CaSE stated over a decade ago,
"Science policy, skills policy, equalities policy and education policy all have implications for diversity in STEM"
While the Department for Education continues to invest in STEM education, the absence of specific diversity-focused funding streams risks perpetuating existing gaps. CaSE's 2021 parliamentary submission proposed a dedicated £10 million annual STEM Diversity Fund, highlighting the need for coordinated, ring-fenced investment and resource-sharing frameworks that bridge policy, industry, and grassroots initiatives.
A promising model is the EPSRC's EDI Hub+, a £2.5 million investment that brings together stakeholders across engineering, physical sciences, and mathematics. By creating a collaborative network, the Hub+ enables evidence-based transformation and cultural shifts. However, its focus on the research ecosystem may overlook those excluded from traditional STEM pathways, such as those in smaller organisations or non-academic roles.
As a solo founder, I've experienced firsthand the barriers to accessing EDI resources that larger organisations take for granted. Accreditations like Investors in Diversity can be financially out of reach, and developing inclusive recruitment tools from scratch is time-consuming. While free resources like the ICAS Toolkit offer foundational guidance, they often lack sector-specific advice: a gap that open-access, collaborative platforms could fill.
True progress demands dismantling 'gatekeeper' practices that reserve expertise for the well-resourced. The APPG's call for a 'STEM Diversity Decade of Action' must prioritise bottom-up collaborations, ensuring that all organisations, regardless of size, can contribute to and benefit from a more inclusive STEM sector.
4. Best Practices for Actionable EDI
From Mentorship to Metrics: Embedding Accountability
Embedding accountability into EDI efforts in STEM requires more than statements of intent-it demands robust, evidence-based practices at every organisational level. Anonymised job applications, for instance, are often promoted to reduce unconscious bias in recruitment and can help level the playing field in initial screening. However, research cautions that anonymity alone is insufficient; while it may increase interview rates for minority candidates, it can also inadvertently hinder targeted support and may delay discrimination to later stages of hiring. The CIPD and ISE both highlight that anonymised CVs should be part of a broader, more strategic approach to inclusive recruitment.
Persistent disparities remain: graduates from low socio-economic backgrounds are 32% less likely to receive job offers than their more privileged peers. Black and Asian candidates are 45% and 29% less likely (respectively) to secure offers compared to white counterparts, even when qualifications are equal. This underscores the need for interventions beyond surface-level fixes. Structured interviews, where all candidates are asked the same questions and evaluated against objective criteria, have proven to significantly reduce unconscious bias and ensure fairer, skills-based assessment.
Mentorship is another cornerstone of effective EDI. My experience with the STEMAZING Women in Foundation Industries programme showed the power of structured mentorship and peer networks in supporting women innovators. Research confirms that mentorship programmes with peer support can improve retention rates for underrepresented groups by up to 40%. The Generation Delta Brave Space Mentoring Programme takes this further by pairing Black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) women doctoral students with BAME professors, fostering honest dialogue about navigating systemic barriers and building a UK-wide support network. Crucially, these programmes operate across institutions, breaking down silos and ensuring mentees are not limited by departmental hierarchies.
True inclusion also means accommodating diverse needs in the workplace. Flexible work arrangements, such as remote or hybrid options, and shorter, focused meetings are vital for employees with disabilities or chronic conditions, supporting both wellbeing and productivity. My own experience has shown that such flexibility benefits not only those with disabilities but the wider team as well.
Ultimately, actionable EDI in STEM industries requires comprehensive strategies: fair hiring practices, meaningful mentorship, and a workplace culture that adapts to intersecting needs. Anything less risks perpetuating entrenched inequalities and missing out on the full breadth of STEM talent.
5. The Business Imperative: Diversity Drives Innovation
Data-Backed ROI: Why Inclusivity Boosts Productivity
Diversity and inclusion are recognised drivers of innovation and business performance in STEM, supported by evidence from the Institute of Physics (IOP) and McKinsey & Company. The IOP highlights that diverse teams consistently outperform less diverse ones in innovation, problem-solving, and business success. Research shows that scientific work by diverse teams is published in higher-impact journals and cited more frequently, demonstrating diversity's role in enhancing originality and reach.
Beyond moral arguments, the IOP points to economic benefits: improved diversity in physics leads to better outcomes for business and the economy. Their strategy places equity, diversity, and inclusion at its core, advocating inclusive leadership and environments as essential to unlocking STEM's full potential. As the IOP's Limit Less report states,
Diversity of thought makes for better physics and a better contribution from physics to solving global challenges.
The business case is reinforced by McKinsey's 2023 report, which finds companies in the top quartile for gender diversity are 25% more likely to outperform financially, and those with ethnic diversity are 36% more likely. Earlier studies showed similar patterns, with top-quartile companies for racial and ethnic diversity 35% more likely to achieve above-average returns. McKinsey notes that diverse leadership brings varied perspectives, improves decision-making, and helps companies win talent, serve customers, and adapt to markets.
As a founder, my view has evolved from seeing diversity as a moral responsibility to recognising it as a driver of innovation and performance. Despite rising UK government R&D budgets, underrepresentation of women, ethnic minorities, and marginalised groups remains, threatening innovation and workforce sustainability.
The education system misses opportunities by not embracing diversity in STEM teaching. For example, contributions from scholars like Al-Khwārizmī, the father of algebra, are often omitted, erasing inspiring stories that could engage and motivate underrepresented students. Incorporating diverse narratives in STEM education could inspire innovation and inclusivity, showing how discoveries evolved to solve real-world problems.
6. From Policy to Practice: Turning APPG Recommendations into Action
Legal Frameworks & Grassroots Mobilisation
The APPG's recommendations provide a blueprint for change, but as the Royal Academy of Engineering emphasises,
policy without implementation is merely aspiration.
While the Equality Act 2010 established a legal framework that organisations must follow, meaningful change requires going beyond compliance to embed EDI principles throughout organisational cultures.
If the APPG recommendations had been implemented earlier, three specific actions would have made a significant difference in my career: large organisations sharing EDI resources with smaller ones, collecting intersectional data, and organisations being bolder about their commitment to EDI.
The idea of resource-sharing particularly appeals to me. Having worked for smaller organisations (outside STEM industries) that lacked capacity to implement EDI initiatives, if larger organisations had shared their tools and best practices, it could have created a more inclusive environment where I felt supported.
Sector-specific initiatives like STEM Equals demonstrate how research-led interventions can create more inclusive communities for women and LGBT+ people in both academia and industry. By examining working cultures through an intersectional lens, STEM Equals identifies systemic inequalities and pilots evidence-based initiatives such as mentoring, training, and policy reform.
Generation Delta further illustrates the power of targeted action. Led by six Black, Asian, and minority ethnic (BAME) female professors, this initiative addresses institutional and personal barriers faced by BAME women throughout the postgraduate research lifecycle. By embedding equitable practices in admissions, supporting progression, and establishing mentoring networks, Generation Delta is laying groundwork for increasing BAME women professors in UK higher education.
Grassroots mobilisation plays a vital role in creating lasting change. Historically, meaningful progress has often been driven by people movements that demand change, ensuring reforms are rooted in lived experiences. For lasting impact, the most effective approach combines grassroots mobilisation with top-down strategies, using the authenticity of community-driven change alongside institutional policies.
Conclusion
Throughout this exploration of EDI resource sharing in STEM, we've seen that intersectional data collection, cross-sector collaboration, and actionable best practices are essential to transforming the sector. Diversity is not only a moral imperative but also a proven driver of innovation, productivity, and long-term growth.
The APPG's call for a 'STEM Diversity Decade of Action' offers a clear framework for progress, but real impact depends on a collective willingness to move beyond siloed efforts. When large organisations share EDI resources with smaller ones, when privacy is safeguarded through robust data governance, and when accountability ensures that policies translate into everyday practice, we create a fairer, more dynamic landscape.
The business case is undeniable: organisations that embrace diversity consistently outperform their peers. Yet the human case is just as powerful. When young people from all backgrounds see themselves reflected in STEM, both in today's workforce and in the stories of past innovators, we unlock talent and ambition that might otherwise go untapped.
While upgrading diversity data and intersectional metrics is vital for understanding where we stand, decades of research show that data alone won’t deliver change. Without a genuine culture of inclusion (where diverse talent feels valued, supported and empowered) STEM industries in the UK will continue to face barriers and miss out on the full benefits of diversity. Bridging the gap requires us to treat EDI resources not as competitive advantages to be guarded, but as shared assets that can elevate the entire field.
For STEM industries in the UK to lead in innovation and impact, we need both a data upgrade and a culture upgrade. The most successful organisations invest not only in tracking progress but in building environments where everyone can thrive. By creating a culture of openness, collaboration, and accountability, we can ensure that STEM industries in the UK becomes truly representative and that innovation is fuelled by the full breadth of society's talent.
