XRAY™ · Framework in development
Most organizations measure their technology and processes carefully. Far fewer look at whether the people closest to the work can get an accurate concern to someone with the authority to act, before it's quietly absorbed or becomes a bigger problem.
What XRAY looks at
When a concern doesn't travel, the usual response is to coach the person who raised it: be more strategic, choose your moment, soften your tone. XRAY looks first at the route the concern had to travel.
Some concerns never move past the people who first noticed them, because raising them has cost more than it returned.
Some travel but lose their meaning or urgency, or arrive without the context anyone would need to act.
Some reach a person whose authority is more a title than an actual decision right.
Some reach the right person and lead to a decision, but no one owns what happens next.
Honest status
The approach: where concerns stop travelling, and why. Drawn from fifteen years of listening to women at work and the global research on women's working lives.
Individual-level (15-IP, 6-EIP) and organization-level (24-EIP, 24-C, 10-C) instruments, each at its own stage of development. They are not validated. Case testing may inform their development; any future validation claim would require a defined method and supporting evidence.
A separate approach, not part of XRAY: a program for engineering organizations, built with Bob Stavig. In a dry-run stage; no cohort is running.
Also separate: an early-stage reflection pilot on why women engineers stay or leave. Not a validated instrument.
For an individual woman, the place to start is Houston. It uses XRAY's way of separating evidence from uncertainty, without running a deeper assessment she hasn't agreed to.
If you lead an organization, I'd like to hear how it happened, including where my framework doesn't fit.