Freudly+971 508685814hello@freudly.ai
Freudly

Diversity and Inclusion in the Workplace Quiz

Diversity and Inclusion in the Workplace Quiz - FreudlyTake a free diversity and inclusion in the workplace quiz to explore your diversity and inclusion in the. Quick, no sign-up needed. Start now!en
Completed in about 10 minutes, the diversity and inclusion in the workplace quiz presents 15 workplace scenarios about responding to exclusion, making fair decisions, and enabling participation. Your result highlights practical strengths and areas for reflection, helping you consider how consistently your everyday choices support a more equitable team.
Questions: 1510 minutes
Diversity and Inclusion: situation and reply bubbles
July 22, 2026July 22, 2026Material has been updatedJuly 22, 2026Material has been published
8,162 views
746 completions
642 likes
Daniel HallPsychologist · Test reviewer
642 likes
Scale Explorer

How the Scales are Structured

Constructive Response and AccountabilityCRaA
Measures how well you notice exclusion, respond proportionately, support affected colleagues, and take steps to prevent recurrence.
example score8/15
8/15Active but situationalexample score
0 – 5Cautious response
6 – 10Active but situational
11 – 15Constructive accountability
A score of 8 suggests you tend to address clearer concerns when they arise, though consistency in follow-through and prevention may vary by situation.
Fair Decisions and OpportunityFDaO
Measures how consistently you use structured, bias-reducing practices to support fair decisions and access to opportunity at work.
example score6/15
6/15Growing structureexample score
0 – 5Informal approach
6 – 10Growing structure
11 – 15Deliberate equity practice
A score of 6 suggests you use fairness tools in some decisions, with room to apply them more consistently across hiring, assignments, and evaluations.
Inclusive Communication and ParticipationICaP
Measures how intentionally you make communication and participation accessible across different styles, needs, locations, and backgrounds.
example score4/15
4/15Emerging awarenessexample score
0 – 5Emerging awareness
6 – 10Developing flexibility
11 – 15Consistent facilitation
A score of 4 suggests you may rely mostly on familiar participation methods and could benefit from adding one additional channel or access check more consistently.
just completed the test
DATA-BASED USER COHORTS

Who Usually Takes This Test?

People managers
41%OF USERS
Team leads and supervisors take it to reflect on how they run meetings, allocate opportunities, and respond when exclusion shows up.
HR and DEI practitioners
34%OF USERS
HR, learning, and inclusion roles use it as a quick self-check to spot strengths and gaps before training or policy work.
Individual contributors
25%OF USERS
Employees without formal authority take it to improve how they speak up, include others in discussions, and handle bias in everyday moments.
BASED ON AGGREGATED, ANONYMIZED DATA FROM TENS OF THOUSANDS OF FREUDLY USERS.
Benchmarking

See How You Compare

Once you complete the test, your results are compared with real-world data from people in your country.
Below is a preview of how scores are typically distributed across each scale.
Shaded area — where most people score
Dot — the average
You — your score lands on each curve after the test— your score, after the test
Constructive Response and AccountabilityCRaA
You?
Average5.8
Typical rangeTypical3.6 – 8
Possible0 – 15
Fair Decisions and OpportunityFDaO
You?
Average8.9
Typical rangeTypical6.5 – 11.3
Possible0 – 15
Inclusive Communication and ParticipationICaP
You?
Average9.6
Typical rangeTypical7.6 – 11.6
Possible0 – 15
Featured On
SAMPLE QUESTIONS

Example Questions From the Test

    • Listen for specific examples, ask what support they want, and consider how essential information can be shared through reliable channels.
    • Invite them to the next informal gathering so they can build stronger connections.
    • Acknowledge the concern and watch future interactions before deciding what to do.
    • Discuss practical ways to include them while also raising the information-flow issue with the relevant team lead.
    • Ask what format would help and explore a workable arrangement without requiring unnecessary personal disclosure.
    • Explain the current process, then ask whether a small adjustment would be enough.
    • Refer the request to the formal process before changing established practice.
    • Clarify the work need, consider available options, and involve the appropriate support function when necessary.
    • Encourage them to speak earlier because live brainstorming depends on quick participation.
    • Share prompts in advance and add silent idea generation before the group discussion.
    • Continue accepting their ideas afterward and bring the strongest ones into the next meeting.
    • Ask which participation formats help them contribute, then adjust some future sessions accordingly.
WHAT THE TEST MEASURES

Diversity and Inclusion in the Workplace Quiz - Description and methodology of the test

People who want to examine how they respond to inclusion challenges at work can use the diversity and inclusion in the workplace quiz as structured self-reflection. It suits employees, managers, team leads, and anyone making everyday decisions about communication, access, feedback, or opportunity. This diversity in the workplace quiz records stated response tendencies in workplace scenarios, not observed behaviour. Results highlight habits linked to fairer participation and accountable action.

What This Assessment Explores

For practical self-reflection, the diversity quiz for the workplace uses situations involving exclusion, access requests, interruptions, stereotype-based humor, promotion patterns, feedback, and communication across differences. It asks what you would notice or do, so the result describes response tendencies rather than identity.

It covers three dimensions:

  • Constructive Response and Accountability (0-15) measures noticing exclusion, responding proportionately, supporting affected colleagues, and preventing repetition; Cautious response (0-5), Active but situational (6-10), and Constructive accountability (11-15) are the bands.
  • Fair Decisions and Opportunity (0-15) measures reducing avoidable bias and widening fair access in hiring, work allocation, evaluation, and support; Informal approach (0-5), Growing structure (6-10), and Deliberate equity practice (11-15) are the bands.
  • Inclusive Communication and Participation (0-15) measures making communication and participation accessible across styles, needs, locations, and backgrounds; Emerging awareness (0-5), Developing flexibility (6-10), and Consistent facilitation (11-15) are the bands.

Methodology and Evidence Base

Each item presents a workplace vignette with four responses. The choices range from immediate interruption and private follow-up to formal escalation, evidence review, accessible participation, and attention to recurring patterns. This format examines judgment across situations, not agreement with abstract statements.

Responses are grouped into three dimension profiles, not a pass-or-fail result. Displayed bands give each scale its named level and range; role, power, available procedures, and situational context affect how a response should be understood. No single option is automatically correct in every workplace.

Its evidence base aligns conceptually with the Bystander Intervention Behavior Scale (Griffith et al., 2022), especially its focus on noticing problems, intervening, supporting affected people, and preventing recurrence; this questionnaire is not an adaptation of that scale. Mor Barak et al. (1998), Nishii (2013), and Shore et al. (2011) provide frameworks for diversity climate, inclusion, fair access, and participation.

The workplace diversity quiz and answers you choose can prompt reflection, but self-report is sensitive to social desirability, workplace context, role, power, and self-awareness. The result describes these response tendencies in hypothetical situations rather than observed conduct.

Literature:
  • Griffith, Jennifer A., Mary Fran T. Malone, and Christine M. Shea. 2022. "From bystander to ally among faculty colleagues: construction and validation of the bystander intervention behavior scale." Equality, Diversity and Inclusion: An International Journal 41(2): 273-293. 10.1108/EDI-02-2021-0050
  • Mor Barak, Michàlle E., David A. Cherin, and Sherry Berkman. 1998. "Organizational and Personal Dimensions in Diversity Climate: Ethnic and Gender Differences in Employee Perceptions." The Journal of Applied Behavioral Science 34(1): 82-104. 10.1177/0021886398341006
  • Nishii, Lisa Hisae. 2013. "The Benefits of Climate for Inclusion for Gender-Diverse Groups." Academy of Management Journal 56(6): 1754-1774. 10.5465/amj.2009.0823
  • Shore, Lynn M., Amy E. Randel, Beth G. Chung, Michelle A. Dean, Karen Holcombe Ehrhart, and Gangaram Singh. 2011. "Inclusion and Diversity in Work Groups: A Review and Model for Future Research." Journal of Management 37(4): 1262-1289. 10.1177/0149206310385943

Updated:

Popular tests
Comments
Leave a Comment