Workplace covering
-
Reveals that 97% of employees “cover” aspects of their identities at work—at great cost to well-being, engagement, and innovation.
​​
-
Explains how covering behavior drains workplace culture and can suppress performance, especially in highly competitive environments.
​​
-
Offers actionable strategies for leaders and organizations to address and reduce the hidden burden of covering, driving true inclusion and business success.
This Hu-X/HiBob study investigates “covering”—when employees hide or minimize parts of their identities, backgrounds, or beliefs to fit in or avoid bias at work. Surveying over 2,000 U.S. employees, it finds covering is nearly universal, most intense for women, younger generations, LGBTQ+ employees, and leaders, and most prevalent in competitive organizational cultures and tech industries. Covering takes a heavy toll, increasing stress, stifling creativity, and weakening performance, with affected employees reporting they could advance further, innovate more, and feel happier if they didn’t have to conceal themselves. The report argues that understanding and addressing covering is essential for organizations seeking to unlock full employee potential, support well-being, and build genuinely inclusive workplaces.
Articles Based
on Hu-X
Covering Study
Who Has Hire Engagement?
-
Learn which companies—Unicorn startups or Fortune 100 giants—currently lead in employee satisfaction and why.​​
-
Discover the most impactful drivers of satisfaction in today's workplace, based on machine learning analysis of Glassdoor data.​​
-
Gain actionable insights for organizations navigating layoffs, culture shifts, and employee engagement challenges.
The study compares employee satisfaction between Unicorn startups and Fortune 100 companies using 2023 Glassdoor data, revealing a dramatic reversal in trends. While Unicorns previously outperformed Fortune 100s, widespread layoffs in tech led to sharp declines in satisfaction, especially with senior management, career opportunities, and culture. Meanwhile, Fortune 100 companies demonstrated resilience, maintaining comparatively steady scores and now ranking higher overall. The report highlights how organizations, regardless of category, can boost retention and satisfaction by focusing on career development and strengthening senior leadership—crucial moves in turbulent times.
What Predicts Engagment?
-
Discover which workplace factors most strongly influence Glassdoor ratings across varied company types.​​
-
Reveals why investing in organizational culture and senior leadership yields the greatest boost to employer reputation.​​​
-
Provides practical recommendations tailored by company size, industry, and region, guiding resource allocation for maximum impact.
​This Hu-X study investigates key drivers of Glassdoor ratings across 341 organizations—Fortune 100s, Unicorn startups, Best Places to Work, and those ranked worst. Using advanced statistics, the research finds that culture and values are consistently the strongest predictor of high ratings, while senior leadership is particularly crucial in large companies and those with lower scores. Notably, DEI and work-life balance have relatively weak average impacts on overall scores except in certain industries/regions. The report highlights the importance of targeting culture, leadership, and career development to enhance employee experience, attract talent, and drive business success in a competitive and volatile labor market.
Get More From Evaluation Forms
-
Shows how simple Level 1 data can reveal powerful insights that dramatically improve executive programs and NPS.​
-
Demonstrates, through real case studies, how to use standard deviation and correlations to refine content, target “defining moments,” and avoid misdiagnosing problems.​
-
Offers a practical, analytics-lite playbook any L&D team can apply with common tools like Excel or Google Sheets.
This article reframes Level 1 evaluations from “smile sheets” into a strategic data source for executive development. Using two client case studies, it shows how going beyond average scores—by examining variation in ratings and correlations with NPS—can surface mismatched difficulty levels, pinpoint high-impact modules, and distinguish design issues from cultural or cohort dynamics. In one case, this led to targeted pre-work and module enhancements; in another, it revealed a deeper tension between newer and long-tenured employees that extended well beyond the program itself.