Thank you for submitting the form. Here you have information on how to use your submissions. If you have coordinated multiple submissions from your own firm, you can obtain the final scoring of all team members by either:
- Requesting your team mates to send you their submissions and creating the organisational results using this template (template link to be created)
- Reaching out to AGN and request the submissions of your organisation. We will send you the total scoring by Domain and for the overall organisation. For this, please contact Mireia Rovira (mrovira@agn.org).
UNDERSTANDING YOUR SUBMISSIONS
The following sections will guide you how to assign maturity levels taking into account individual and group responses, and rating by domain and for the overall organisation.
YOUR SUBMISSIONS – BY RESPONDANT AND BY DOMAIN
Here you can see how each domain score is converted to a maturity level:
| Domain Score Range | Maturity Level | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 5-10 | Level 1: Fouondational | The organisation is in early stages. Support for women is ad hoc, and key systems or leadership accountability are not yet in place. |
| 11-17 | Level 2: Developing | Some structures are present, but implementation is inconsistent. There’s growing awareness, but action is not fully embedded across the organisation |
| 18-25 | Level 3: Embedded & Leading | Practices are well-integrated, leaders are accountable, and support for women is both systemic and visible in the culture. |
Example Output
| Domain | Score | Maturity Level |
|---|---|---|
| Leadership & Accountability | 20 | Level 3 |
| Policy & Process | 15 | Level 2 |
| Culture & Behaviours | 9 | Level 1 |
| Capability & Development | 24 | Level 3 |
| Voice & Experience | 12 | Level 2 |
YOUR SUBMISSIONS – BY RESPONDANT AND OVERALL SCORE:
| Total score | Maturity Level | Meaning |
|---|---|---|
| 25 – 65 | Level 1: Fouondational | The organisation is in early stages. Support for women is ad hoc, and key systems or leadership accountability are not yet in place. |
| 66 – 105 | Level 2: Developing | Some structures are present, but implementation is inconsistent. There’s growing awareness, but action is not fully embedded across the organisation |
| 106 – 125 | Level 3: Embedded & Leading | Practices are well-integrated, leaders are accountable, and support for women is both systemic and visible in the culture. |
YOUR SUBMISSIONS – OVERALL ORGANISATION AND BY DOMAIN
How it works: Add the scores per Domain, from each of the respondents from the same organisation and divide the total by the number of respondents.
Example Output (per single organisation with 5 respondents)
| Domain | Total Score from all 5 respondents | Average Score = Total Score / 5 | Maturity Level of organisation |
|---|---|---|---|
| Leadership & Accountability | 30 | 6 | Level 1 |
| Policy & Process | 95 | 19 | Level 3 |
| Culture & Behaviours | 50 | 10 | Level 2 |
| Capability & Development | 75 | 15 | Level 2 |
| Voice & Experience | 115 | 23 | Level 3 |
YOUR SUBMISSIONS – BY ORGANISATION AND OVERALL SCORE:
To assess the organisation as a whole:
- Calculate the total score across all questions.
- Use this total to assign an overall maturity level, based on average score
| Total Score | Average | Maturity Level |
|---|---|---|
| 25 – 58 | > 1.4 | Level 1: Foundational |
| 59 – 92 | 2 – 3.7 | Level 2: Developing |
| 93 – 125 | < 3.72 | Level 3: Embedded & Leading |
UNDERSTANDING THE RESULTS OF THE SURVEY
In addition to the Maturity Level identified in your scoring, you can look closer to the importance of the feedback provided. Here you have some examples on how do do this by looking at question correlations.
Question Correlation – Reason and Impact
To identify high correlations between the quantitative questions across all Domains, the concept of how each Domain reinforces or influences each other in practice was considered. These correlations can be positive (when both improve together) or negative (when one improves while the other worsens). Qualitative questions help explain the “why” behind the correlation.
Here are 3 strong examples of highly correlated pairs, the reason for correlation, and their organisational impact:
Example 1:
Highly Correlated Questions:
Leadership & Accountability Q2: Leaders are accountable for gender inclusion through KPIs or performance reviews.
Culture & Behaviours Q3: Gender-based microaggressions or bias are actively addressed
when identified.
Why They’re Correlated:
When leaders are held explicitly accountable through KPIs, it signals to the organisation that inclusion is a priority. This usually translates to concrete actions like addressing microaggressions swiftly and seriously. Accountability drives responsiveness.
Impact to Organisation:
This correlation enhances psychological safety and trust. Employees, especially women, see that discriminatory behaviours have consequences, leading to higher engagement and retention. It also signals to all staff that inclusive behaviour is non-negotiable, not optional.
Example 2:
Highly Correlated Questions:
Capability & Development Q2: Women have equal access to career development, training,
and mentorship programs.
Voice & Experience Q1: Women are equally likely as men to report feeling valued and heard.
Why They’re Correlated:
When women receive equal access to development, it’s not just about skills, it’s about being seen as valuable future leaders. This representation in growth opportunities feeds their perception of being heard and valued.
Impact to Organisation:
This strengthens the leadership pipeline and reduces attrition of talented women. It also boosts employer brand equity as women are more likely to recommend and stay with an organisation where they feel they belong and are invested in.
Example 3:
Highly Correlated Questions:
Policy & Process Q1: Gender equity is embedded in recruitment, promotion, and performance processes.
Leadership & Accountability Q3: Senior leaders role-model inclusive behaviour consistently.
Why They’re Correlated:
Fair processes alone aren’t enough; when senior leaders model inclusion, it lends credibility to the fairness of systems. Conversely, if leaders don’t walk the talk, even strong processes can be undermined.
Impact to Organisation:
The alignment between process and leader behaviour increases perceived fairness and integrity. This reduces internal cynicism and drives authentic inclusion. It also increases success in attracting diverse talent who assess both policy and lived culture.
FINAL NOTE
Correlations like these help organisations prioritise actions. For example, if senior leadership accountability is weak, it may hinder both cultural change and the success of policies. Likewise, without equitable development, women may disengage regardless of strong voice mechanisms.
Put this in context when reflecting on the Maturity Levels indentified at domain and global level in the overall results of all the submissions of your organisation. Here is a brief reminder of the maturity levels and their meaning.
| Maturity Level | Meaning |
|---|---|
| Level 1: Fouondational | The organisation is in early stages. Support for women is ad hoc, and key systems or leadership accountability are not yet in place. |
| Level 2: Developing | Some structures are present, but implementation is inconsistent. There’s growing awareness, but action is not fully embedded across the organisation |
| Level 3: Embedded & Leading | Practices are well-integrated, leaders are accountable, and support for women is both systemic and visible in the culture. |
If you want further analysis of your firms framework you can reach out to consultant expert who helped designing this survyey – Elisabeth Batalla elizabeth.batalla@achievementandexcellence.com) – The Institute for Achievement and Excellence.
ANNEX – HOW THE SCORES ARE CALCULATED
Scale used in survey
| Scoring system for quantitative questions | Scoring system for qualitative questions |
| 1 = Strongly Disagree 2 = Disagree 3 = Neutral 4 = Agree 5 = Strongly Agree | 1 = Very Poor 2 = Poor 3 = Neutral 4 = High 5 = Very High |
Quantitative and Qualitative combination scoring
A value is assigned to the qualitative questions ( based on your criteria) and added to the quantitative score to have a combined score, which is used to generate combined scores as demonstrated in points 1 to 4 below.
Scoring by Domain
Each Domain contains 3 quantitative questions and 2 qualitative questions, with scores ranging from 5 to 25 per Domain.
Minimum: 5 (if every answer is 1)
Maximum: 25 (if every answer is 5)