Download
Authors

Laure Bakobza, Hannah Chappell, Angie Choi, Zoe Coombs, Shoshana Davidson, Tim Hardy, Reny Kiryakova, Eva Kolker, Miller Piggott, Nilufer Rahim, Shagnik Deb Roy, Jelka Stojanov, Guilia Tagliaferri

Partners
https://youthfuturesfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2026/02/Kier_Group_logo.jpg
Kier Group

What works for recruitment and retention  · 

View bio
Kier Group
Employer partner

ProgrammeWhat works for recruitment and retention

StatusActive

View partner View bio

About Kier Group

Kier Group is a leading infrastructure and construction group, with 10,000 colleagues across the UK, including hundreds of young people in early career roles.

Working with Youth Futures

Kier Group is helping build the evidence on what works in the recruitment and retention of young people.

By working with us, Kier not only gains insights to strengthen their practice and support the future of their workforce, but helps create evidence that can be used by employers across the country, so more young people can access and thrive within employment.

https://youthfuturesfoundation.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/03/Behavioural-Insights-Team-logo-scaled.png
Behavioural Insights Team

 · 

View bio
Behavioural Insights Team
Evaluation panel, Research & evaluation partner

Programme

StatusActive

View partner View bio

About

BIT (Behavioural Insights Team) is a global research and innovation consultancy which uses a deep understanding of human behaviour to improve people’s lives. Its work spans the full delivery lifecycle – insight, intervention, evaluation, and capacity building.

Working with Youth Futures

BIT collaborates with us on research and evaluation activity as a member of our evaluation panel.

Currently, it is conducting an evaluation of the demonstrator phase of our Building Futures programme.

Overview

Following a successful Feasibility Study, Youth Futures commissioned the Behavioural Insights Team (BIT) to deliver a Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT) with Kier Group employees, who were randomly allocated to receive one of two email campaigns asking them to share their diversity information:

  • The ‘standard’ campaign reflected the kind of communication employers commonly use when requesting diversity information – emails were longer, more formal and included more detailed information about why Kier was collecting the data and how it would be used.
  • The behaviourally informed campaign was shorter, more visual and personalised, came from a named senior leader and included a prominent call to action with a time estimate for completing the ask
The RCT involved:
  • An impact evaluation that measured the impact of the campaigns on diversity characteristics disclosure amongst Kier employees.
  • An implementation and process evaluation (IPE) that examined campaign delivery and experience.
  • An economic evaluation that estimated the cost of delivering each campaign alongside the disclosure achieved.

The main report summarises the study, key findings, and next steps. The accompanying technical report details in full the RCT design and all evaluation findings.

Background

Workforce diversity data can reveal where different groups are underrepresented or experiencing poorer outcomes in recruitment, retention and progression. But gaps in disclosure leave employers with an incomplete picture, making it harder to identify where barriers exist and where action is needed.

Like many employers, Kier has gaps in its workforce diversity data. To build evidence on how employers can tackle low or uneven diversity disclosure rates, Kier came on board to put their practice to the test, aiming to build an evidence based solution to this issue and to share learnings with the wider employment sector.

Key insights

The behaviourally informed campaign led to lower diversity disclosure than the standard campaign amongst both Kier employees aged 16-24 and those aged 25 and over.

The behaviourally informed campaign also resulted in fewer employees providing all characteristics than the standard campaign and lower disclosure of disability, neurodiversity, ethnicity and social mobility across both disadvantaged and non-disadvantaged identities.

There are several possible explanations for this surprising headline finding:
  • Kier employees also felt like an explanation of the organisational purpose behind disclosure was missing, which the standard campaign provided.
  • The named senior sender made the request feel important but was not always seen as the most relevant messenger
  • The call-to-action button may have prompted caution because employees are encouraged to be wary of unfamiliar links.

These insights suggest that brevity, personalisation and ease may need to be balanced with a clear organisational rationale, an appropriate messenger and confidence in the request’s legitimacy.

Interviews also highlighted broader factors shaping disclosure, including trust in how information would be handled, clarity of the questions and ease of the disclosure process. Some employees reported selectively withholding sensitive information, particularly relating to health or disability, due to privacy concerns or fears about potential workplace consequences.

Finally, both campaigns generated considerable engagement at relatively low cost, with the standard campaign and the behaviourally informed campaign costing just £1.46 and £1.47 per disclosing employee within the four-week trial period respectively. Provided that practical requirements for large-scale delivery of email communication campaigns can be met, these results demonstrate that relatively simple email campaigns can achieve substantial engagement with limited delivery resources.

Recommendations

The evaluation does not support adopting the behaviourally informed campaign in its current form instead of the standard approach. However, the findings offer useful lessons for employers seeking to improve diversity disclosure:

  1. Combine the strongest features of both campaigns: Keep communications concise, personalised and easy to act on, while clearly explaining why information is collected, how it will be used and how it will be protected.
  2. Make disclosure easy and accessible: Use straightforward forms and clear questions, and consider other trusted channels alongside email to reach different parts of your workforce.
  3. Build trust around sensitive information: Be clear about confidentiality and how information will be used, particularly where employees may be more hesitant to disclose.
  4. Plan for effective delivery: Ensure sufficient staff capacity, reliable communication systems, accurate contact details and early coordination between relevant teams.
  5. Test and adapt your approach: Different approaches may work at different stages, so test what works and use the results to refine communications and reminders.

Want to read the full report?

Programme graphic
Questions graphic