Summary of impact article contributions
| Contributions | EDI Problematization | Constituent engagement | Collaboration approaches | Impact outcomes | Ethics of impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| van Dijk (2026): Mental and institutional barriers to creating impact | Observations of status through micro-behaviors (e.g. eye gazer, smile, nod, remark) while working on New Inclusion Theory (“doing inclusion”) | Organizational change management consultants, academics | Including behavior training, practice, research collaboration | Train the trainer training program (originated with 16 researchers from 5 countries to 29 trainers in 7 countries) | Creation of the Including Behavior Institute to disseminate and sustain including behavior training |
| Challenges from institutional and mental barriers to demonstrating non-scholarly impact | Non-scholarly impact as a joint responsibility between researchers and academic institutions | ||||
| Liu and Taylor (2026): Making a feminist impact: mobilizing knowledge through scholarly activism | Yearn to build community and search for co-conspirators on intersectional feminism | Academics (doctoral candidates and early career researchers) to marginalized women in leadership coaching, business consultancy, and community organizers | Multiple forms of open communication which led to sharing of resources (teaching, EDI knowledge, self-care and wellbeing), workshops, and mentorships (care labor and academic advice) | Creation of scholarly activist website* as a knowledge mobilization project | Absence of institutional support and high personal costs to community building Empowerment of marginalized women and a redefinition of what counts as leadership and who gets to be a leader |
| *Nov 1, 2020 to June 30, 2023 (155,000 unique visitors and 1,804 subscribers) | |||||
| Development of scholarly activist ethic, which embodied feminist values of collectivity, vulnerability, generosity, and service. | |||||
| Fitzsimmons et al. (2026): Co-creating impact: Positioning Indigenous knowledge holders as expert researchers | Exploration of Indigenous women ranger leadership through Indigenous ways of knowing | Inclusion of Indigenous women rangers as non-academic research associates; different rightsholders (individuals, communities, organizations), including land management organization | Suspension of western research methodologies and positioning Indigenous women as research experts and knowledge co-creators | Recognition, acceptance, and embrace of Indigenous epistemologies | Decolonizing of western researched ontology, epistemology and methodology and a focus on centering Indigenous ways of knowing (Indigenous knowledge systems). |
| Adoption of dadirri and yarning circles as data collection and interpretation (reflexivity) methodologies | Amplifying Indigenous women as voices as leaders and advocates for policy change | Evolution in understanding impact (relational, trust, and self-organization) | |||
| Muhr and Storm (2026): Accounting for change: The implications of using the intervention based-research method GenderLAB at a big four accounting firm | Challenges in achieving 25% women in partner and board positions in an accounting firm | Employees from all (lower) levels and departments, HR responsible partner, CEO Research partnership with accounting firm utilizing GenderLAB (intervention-based research) | Participants at workshop identified and generated solution ideas during intervention; solution ideas shared and adopted by management | Immediate and medium-term following research intervention. Unit managers implemented some research intervention exercises; Employee Resource Groups (ERGs) and affinity groups were formed. Accounting firm also offered support to enable parenthood | Solutions and policy changes were made by managers (top down) rather than collective accountability |
| Intervention follows norm critical and design thinking approaches to change norms/attitudes and generate hands-on solutions | Creation of suite of LAB interventions (e.g. QueerLAB, InclusionLAB) publicly available | ||||
| Cukier et al. (2026): Advancing inclusion innovation in Canada: The impact of the IIE-Net project | Create change for more inclusive entrepreneurship ecosystem for equity-seeking groups | Collaborative research network (Inclusive Innovation and Entrepreneurship IIE-Net) comprising of academic (45 academics from 22 institutions) and partner organizations (governments, universities, women entrepreneurship support groups, corporations) | Critical ecology model of change at the societal, organizational, and individual levels | Outcomes are tracked across 5 themes: how issues are defined and constructed; benchmarking ecosystem; how different organizations constrain or enable women and diverse entrepreneurs; characteristics, knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of entrepreneurs, gatekeepers and decision-makers; development of policies for capacity building | Reliance on large network enables significant allocation and sharing of resources |
| Brings together academics and practitioners. Research and collaboration are used to drive change in practices and policies | Guided by the 50–30 Challenge (50% representation of women and 30% representation of equity-seeking groups) |
| Contributions | EDI Problematization | Constituent engagement | Collaboration approaches | Impact outcomes | Ethics of impact |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Observations of status through micro-behaviors (e.g. eye gazer, smile, nod, remark) while working on New Inclusion Theory (“doing inclusion”) | Organizational change management consultants, academics | Creation of the Including Behavior Institute to disseminate and sustain | |||
| Challenges from institutional and mental barriers to demonstrating non-scholarly impact | Non-scholarly impact as a joint responsibility between researchers and academic institutions | ||||
| Yearn to build community and search for co-conspirators on intersectional feminism | Academics (doctoral candidates and early career researchers) to marginalized women in leadership coaching, business consultancy, and community organizers | Multiple forms of open communication which led to sharing of resources (teaching, EDI knowledge, self-care and wellbeing), workshops, and mentorships (care labor and academic advice) | Creation of scholarly activist website* as a knowledge mobilization project | Absence of institutional support and high personal costs to community building | |
| *Nov 1, 2020 to June 30, 2023 (155,000 unique visitors and 1,804 subscribers) | |||||
| Development of scholarly activist ethic, which embodied feminist values of collectivity, vulnerability, generosity, and service. | |||||
| Exploration of Indigenous women ranger leadership through Indigenous ways of knowing | Inclusion of Indigenous women rangers as non-academic research associates; different rightsholders (individuals, communities, organizations), including land management organization | Suspension of western research methodologies and positioning Indigenous women as research experts and knowledge co-creators | Recognition, acceptance, and embrace of Indigenous epistemologies | Decolonizing of western researched ontology, epistemology and methodology and a focus on centering Indigenous ways of knowing (Indigenous knowledge systems). | |
| Adoption of | Amplifying Indigenous women as voices as leaders and advocates for policy change | Evolution in understanding impact (relational, trust, and self-organization) | |||
| Challenges in achieving 25% women in partner and board positions in an accounting firm | Employees from all (lower) levels and departments, HR responsible partner, CEO | Participants at workshop identified and generated solution ideas during intervention; solution ideas shared and adopted by management | Immediate and medium-term following research intervention. Unit managers implemented some research intervention exercises; Employee Resource Groups (ERGs) and affinity groups were formed. Accounting firm also offered support to enable parenthood | Solutions and policy changes were made by managers (top down) rather than collective accountability | |
| Intervention follows norm critical and design thinking approaches to change norms/attitudes and generate hands-on solutions | Creation of suite of LAB interventions (e.g. QueerLAB, InclusionLAB) publicly available | ||||
| Create change for more inclusive entrepreneurship ecosystem for equity-seeking groups | Collaborative research network (Inclusive Innovation and Entrepreneurship IIE-Net) comprising of academic (45 academics from 22 institutions) and partner organizations (governments, universities, women entrepreneurship support groups, corporations) | Critical ecology model of change at the societal, organizational, and individual levels | Outcomes are tracked across 5 themes: how issues are defined and constructed; benchmarking ecosystem; how different organizations constrain or enable women and diverse entrepreneurs; characteristics, knowledge, attitudes, and behaviors of entrepreneurs, gatekeepers and decision-makers; development of policies for capacity building | Reliance on large network enables significant allocation and sharing of resources | |
| Brings together academics and practitioners. Research and collaboration are used to drive change in practices and policies | Guided by the 50–30 Challenge (50% representation of women and 30% representation of equity-seeking groups) |